scratch-mark

Bulletproof Executive Dave Asprey and Mark “Daily Apple” Sisson on Resistant Starch

And it’s in video.

Here’s the podcast page with the show program. The resistant starch stuff starts at about 37 minutes in.

Incidentally, I largely agree with Mark on his “carbohydrate curve.”

100-150 grams/day – Primal Blueprint Maintenance Range

I think there’s an enormous difference between 30-60g per day and 80-120g per day. And with the right carbs (starchy veggies, white rice and legumes—not grains, sweet foods and sugar drinks) I think fat loss can still be a factor in a range of 100-200, 150 being a daily average.

Anyway, nice discussion and willingness to keep the door open on this. If you think I’m miffed by Dave’s more speculative stance, you would be wrong. I surely need the skeptics out there to help keep me in line.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

270 Comments

  1. DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 09:39

    Sounds like Asprey is trying to tell us that he has a lot of bad bacteria in his gut.

    • gabriella kadar on March 10, 2014 at 10:05

      Duckie, or lack of good ones.



    • Gina on March 10, 2014 at 10:37

      Asprey is sensitive to or allergic to absolutely everything, it seems. His definition of “bulletproof” is living in a bubble. I’d rather not be bulletproof if it means I can’t drink a cup of Folgers without getting sick.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 11:07

      “Asprey is sensitive to or allergic to absolutely everything, it seems.”

      I must say, Gina, that’s an observation i’ve always wondered about. It’s reminiscent of Matt Stone who once gave a list of 10-20 conditions he experienced on LC in some blog comment and someone replied:

      “You’re such a tender little flower.”

      It’s a weird thing for me. I have no idea why guys want to advertise their weaknesses, or even contrive them. To me, the natural tendency of men is to first recognize, correct, and only then tell of the weakness, but in the past tense.



    • Darin on March 10, 2014 at 12:45

      Hear hear… You’ve eloquently expressed my feelings. My son starts his comments with “I can’t”… I cut him off and say “figure it out”. Figure it out or suffer. You’re choice.



    • Chupo on March 10, 2014 at 16:53

      It sounds like a reason for bulletproof butyrate caps and/or suppositories since the real thing is just too toxic.



    • Harriet on March 10, 2014 at 17:20

      As one who used to be allergic or sensitive to everything I ate/consumed (even tap water) and everything I smelled I can understand the angst of those in that situation. I also know it is possible to recover from most of them. It only took 6 weeks of strict limited paleo eating (+meditation + personal work +rest) to be able to tolerate the basics which I then expanded to include other foods. From free range lamb to FR beef, to fish, to chicken. From red apples to green ones and to other fruit. From carrots to cabbage and so on. RS and improving gut biome is the latest experiment. There are a lot of symptoms I no longer have – the list goes over pages if written out, but basically I now have mediocre health not very poor health so hope is there for further improvement to great health. Anyone who has these problems, keep experimenting and be aware that living in a bubble should only need to be a temporary affair.



    • Gina on March 10, 2014 at 20:08

      Richard:

      My armchair analysis of Dave: I don’t think he views his sensitivities as weaknesses, rather heightened awareness or some such nonsense. He appears to get some perverse enjoyment out of thinking of himself as the canary in a coal mine.

      I think he means well, but I just don’t see why anyone would covet his results. It’s like the LCHF crowd bragging about their improved health, including the fact that they have lost the ability to drink a Coke without ending up in a coma. Fragility is a bug, not a feature.



    • gabriella kadar on March 11, 2014 at 01:50

      Asprey has very short eyebrows. I was looking at his pictures from when he was young and 300 pounds. He has more eyebrow. Maybe his thyroid function is suboptimal. Which may explain his attraction to coffee.



    • donjoe on March 12, 2014 at 17:05

      Asprey is little more than a slimy salesman who is probably trying to get the audience worried that maybe they have those gut problems too and might consequently benefit from buying one of the crackpot nonsense products he’s peddling. (Has anyone heard him talk about “electric medicine” trying to sell his little gadgets or about his “bulletproof coffee” that solves a problem that doesn’t need solving? And can you still listen to him with a straight face after that? How this guy got so popular among people who care about science-based medicine and nutrition I will never understand.)



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 19:05

      I don’t have a problem with his gadgets. Some of them are legitimate. Nothing wrong with trying to make a profit if they work for people. It’s the potential for harm that needs to be avoided from careless recommendations — particularly when there’s a wealth of data and research that raises warning flags.



    • donjoe on March 12, 2014 at 19:28

      Oh, “some of them are legitimate”. Name one and its supporting evidence (as Dave himself is too busy hiding his scientific references behind paywalls; and that’s assuming he has any scientific references).



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 19:41

      Easy donjoe. I don’t care enough one way or another. His gadget recommendations are mildly beneficial at best and a total waste of money at worst. But, his diet recommendations may very well be harmful over the long term, and that’s the real problem. Let’s not waste our breath debating silly gadgets.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2014 at 20:46

      I said I wouldn’t jump into this, but hard to resist. Bea and I had dinner with Dr BG, her sister, Dave and Patrick (Paleohacks) at a steakhouse coupla years back.

      Dave had a gadget. Even Bea, who kinda wants to believe in anything was not too impressed with whether it works or not. She’s nursed a sore shoulder for years, now dong ART with sports chiro guys and that seems to be helping.

      OK, I’m willing to admit that Bea just didn’t give it enough time and with more dosing, probably larger dosing, it wouldn’t have made her fart so much. 🙂



  2. Qorimayu on March 10, 2014 at 09:56

    There’s so much attention going round for RS at the moment.

    Loving all the self experimentation that’s going on and really appreciate all the effort You, Tatertot and other commenters have brought to light. Thank You.

    Today I phoned up the UK company that I ordered some BRM PS from enquiring about my order that still hasn’t arrived and the guy on the phone instantly knew what the undelivered product was before I’d even mentioned it (it’s that much in demand at the minute). He said the orders were going “crazy”.

    To any UK readers finding it hard to get BRM potato starch:

    I’ve managed to get my hands on some other potato starch from Infinity Foods here in the UK from a few sources. Pleased that it’s organically produced but disappointed that my BRM didn’t come so I could try to keep a fair comparison going with the majority of folk on here that use PS. I’m hoping it’s legit.

    Infinity Foods sell 2 powders one labelled as “Flour” and the other as “Starch”. With the stuff I have (starch) I mixed 3-4 heaped dessert spoons in cold water to see how it’d react. When I put the final spoonful in and drop the spoon to the bottom of the glass the spoon feels stuck tight to the starch which feels really hard and solid. The solution seems to separate after time and the starch settles at the bottom sticking solidly and really tightly to the spoon again. I’m sure i read that this is one of the indications that it is indeed potato starch. Is this true, anyone?

    I also measured my blood glucose every 20minutes or so over a period of about an hour and a half after drinking and a rise wasn’t indicated.

    There’s no mention on the labelling whether the product is ‘unmodified’ or raw as BRM is reported to be but according to an Italian website (I think the product is produced in Italy) the company has confirmed that the ‘flour’ IS made from raw potatoes:

    “Nonostante si chiami indistintamente potato starch e flour (amido e farina), l’azienda Infinity Foods conferma che si tratta di solo amido da patate crude. E’ una scelta di marketing per acchiappare di più. Potete leggere il comunicato stampa con il chiarimento dell’azienda a riguardo.”

    I guess I still have a few questions:

    Does what I have described above provide enough evidence that what I’m using is legit as a good source of RS?\

    Is it important to confirm that our PS is unmodified?

    Although RS in general doesn’t appear to register a blood glucose response, how much of a caloric impact would it then have? We use calorically what the critters eventually break it down into, right?

    Thanks again, Richard for all you do and Tatertot for your presence here answering our questions

    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 11:22

      “When I put the final spoonful in and drop the spoon to the bottom of the glass the spoon feels stuck tight to the starch which feels really hard and solid. The solution seems to separate after time and the starch settles at the bottom sticking solidly and really tightly to the spoon again. I’m sure i read that this is one of the indications that it is indeed potato starch. Is this true, anyone?”

      Yep, real stuff. Google non-Newtonian fluid and then celebrate a countryman. 🙂

      have you done the 1-minute nuke test yet?



    • Qorimayu on March 10, 2014 at 12:25

      If you’re referring to the eruptions from my arse then yes some are approaching 60s (love it). I do suspect however you’re referring to the 1 minute microwave test which I’ve not yet done.

      I take it if it turns to hair gel then it’s good stuff..?



  3. tatertot on March 10, 2014 at 10:11

    If Dave actually did do a ‘Potato Flour’ enema — he learned that somewhere other than FTA and he deserves any and all rashes he gets.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 10:55

      Tim:

      He probably got it here, but not from me. I think Spanish Caravan was the one who put that out there. Thing is, he consciously resisted shitting it out right away which is what an enema typically is. I believe he did it right before bed, held it in, let the liquid get taken up and if I recall had the most awesome shit of his life in the morning.

      But, no, Dave didn’t get it form me.

      I dont think I’ll try it. Cavemen didn’t have enema bottles and we all know, you can’t fool Mother Caveman. 🙂



    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 11:19

      I think Tim is referring to the fact that he probably used “flour” and not “starch”. Asprey confused starch and flour when he first posted the RS article, confused them again during the podcast and I’d be willing to bet he messed it up when he shoved it up his ass.

      He also told people to put “potato flour” into their bulletproof coffee. His entire understanding of RS is just awful.

      The enema part isn’t so weird. People have been using starch enemas for thousands of years. The Egyptians used to use tiger nut starch enemas (says so right on the Wikipedia page for tiger nuts).



    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 11:29

      It’s almost bizarre how terrible he was, and still is, about giving erroneous information about RS. It’s almost as if he wants to spread incorrect information (use “potato flour” and “put it in your coffee” and “you’re gonna die if you have 0.01% glacier bacteria in you and you take prebiotics”).

      It’s just fear-mongering and misinformation. There’s nothing constructive or helpful about it.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 12:06

      “I think Tim is referring to the fact that he probably used “flour” and not “starch”.”

      Can’t recall what he said in the actual PC, but I think he got it right. Not just me, but others corrected him on his initial post and it got corrected.

      Doubt it’s anything to hang hats on. Benefit of doubt.



    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 12:28

      Here’s what he said:

      I’m a fan of Richard Nikoley…and he’s certainly talking about taking mass amounts of basically white potato flour, unheated raw potato flour and using it like a supplement to change his gut biome…

      …if you take it orally, the lectins…which are part of the raw potato flour may cause problems. I am sensitive to that kind of lectin. So, I took it orally for a little while and what do you know, I got the rashes that come from potatoes.

      Started plantain flour…and then I started getting hives from it.

      I dunno. He certainly makes it sound like you recommend eating some kind of poisonous “flour” full of lectins.



    • Kathy on March 11, 2014 at 16:25

      I unfortunately break out in hives from potato and banana starch. I also can’t tolerate probiotics, same problem. I think it’s histamine related. I wish I could figure out how to resolve this issue.



    • Alie on March 11, 2014 at 16:53

      Chris Kresser has some articles on his site and I’ve seen where people have had some success with using the SBO’s for histamine intolerance. I’m not sure if this would work for you, but you could research it and see if it sounds like it might. I have had trouble with the potato starch, but after using SBO’s for only a week and a half, I’m tolerating both potatoes and potato starch better. Not perfect, yet, but there is progress. I will say that my issue is more likely food sensitivity from low carb rather than histamine sensitivity as you may have.



    • Jer on March 11, 2014 at 17:06

      Try stinging nettle leaf . Reduces the amount of histamine the body releases in response to an allergen.
      http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/herb/stinging-nettle



  4. ChocoTaco369 on March 10, 2014 at 10:29

    I think the issue is there isn’t any Upgraded Potato Starch you can sell for $30 a bag yet.

    • Gina on March 10, 2014 at 10:39

      Prepare yourself, the discovery that Bob’s Red Mill potato starch is full of mycotoxins is coming.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 10:57

      I’d like to get my friend Monica Hughes (PhD mycologist) and Dave in a room together.



    • Thomas on March 10, 2014 at 11:01

      Haha, so true.

      Bullshit marketing.

      BTW: The whole thing about mycotoxins in regular coffee is BS. If I recall correctly, Onnit and/or Caveman Coffee did some tests and it turns out that Starbucks and any other high-quality coffee bean don’t even have trace amounts of mycotoxins in them.



    • ChocoTaco369 on March 10, 2014 at 12:10

      It’s funny. You can’t eat beans and grains because they contain phytic acid. However, nuts, coffee and cocoa have the highest levels of phytic acid of anything on Earth.

      The only reason why these bullshit guidelines exist is because you can sell a rigorous, exclusionary plan. You can’t sell “just eat whole foods.” It’s too simple.

      When will people learn it isn’t so much what you eat, but what you DON’T eat, that makes you healthy.



    • GTR on March 10, 2014 at 16:24

      @Thomas – “The whole thing about mycotoxins in regular coffee […] any other high-quality coffee don’t even have trace amounts of mycotoxins” – so what are you talking about: regular, or high-end coffee?



    • Adrienne on March 13, 2014 at 15:16

      @Thomas

      Speaking of coffee — it’s a decent source of soluble fiber — especially instant coffee. I love coffee — from single origin expressos and pressed coffee all the way to my daily home habit — instant organic.

      http://www.coffee-tea.co.uk/dietary-fiber-coffee.php
      https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/food-thought/gut-feeling-about-coffee



  5. LeonRover on March 10, 2014 at 11:20

    My favourite modern sport:

    Forcing a nutritionist to take an enama of their own schtick. It rapidly turns explosive.

    “For ’tis the sport to have the nutritioneer hoist with own petar’.”

    Alas, Poor Dave.

    Sláinte

  6. Ben on March 10, 2014 at 11:28

    I bought tong master potato starch in the UK. Any thoughts?

  7. Alie on March 10, 2014 at 12:06

    That was a very interesting podcast. Thank you for posting it! It is interesting that Dave Asprey got hives from the plantain flour. I understand the potato thing – I was having a severe itching reaction to potatoes, but that is completely gone now that I’m also taking the SBO’s. Last night I went out and had the most awesome french fries with truffle butter and…wait for it…no itching! I was a bit manic and couldn’t sleep, but hey, one step at a time.

    Also, I’m wondering about a healing crisis, for lack of a better term. This past week and a half since starting SBO’s I have been a freak show. I’m generally a very healthy person with lots of energy, but it seems like every ailment I’ve ever had, physical and emotional, manifested itself this past week. I decided to keep at it and finally I’m not only getting better, but I feel amazing.

    It would seem that simply from a common sense stance, there is too much evidence to discount RS or blame it for a specific ailment. We may be sensitive to a particular food, but it may be the case that fixing our gut would also “fix” that sensitivity.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 10, 2014 at 12:18

      Alie:

      I hear you. I am more convinced than ever that the biome is both overlooked but hugely important. And it has good and bad days too, because it’s dependent upon what we feed it.



    • Alie on March 10, 2014 at 13:18

      Exactly. We throw all these supplements at all of our ailments and fail to correct the very thing that needs correcting. It has never made sense to me that we need mega doses of vitamin-this-or-that, or iodine, or whatever (unless, of course, there’s a verifiable deficiency). Now, I finally feel like I can “trust my gut” as it were.



    • Art on March 10, 2014 at 13:38

      Nice timing, Allie

      I hope I’ll follow your trajectory. Feeling very grim now having started SBOs last week. Old shoulder injury has returned with vigour; aches, coughs and headaches too. A robust sort, I’m not used to it.

      (Using the inexpensive Swanson efforts a number have mentioned but going with four a day since they’re pretty underpowered.)

      I’ve also started taking some baobab powder. Lots of fermentable fibre and more besides: it comes with the Jeff Leach seal of approval. Impossible to say whether it’s done any good but adds a pleasing piquancy to yoghurt.



    • Alie on March 10, 2014 at 15:45

      Art: I hope it clears up for you soon. I did alot of research before I came to that conclusion. I have continued with RS at every meal and am eating other probiotics, as it seems you are as well. I actually have hesitated posting anything, thinking I would wait until I knew for sure that the SBO’s were working, but I know they are, just not in the way I expected. I started with Primal Defense and am now taking Prescript Assist.

      In spite of the list of physical and emotional ailments, I am handling stress well, so I know something is different in a good way and that has helped me through. My symptoms have been quite dramatic, actually, and I will write about them in more detail later. Now, it is just enough that I was able to get outside and do some yardwork and absorb some sunshine 🙂



    • gabriella kadar on March 10, 2014 at 19:09

      Not 100% sure here, but based on my own experience, I think anything that makes a big change in the gut biome (good or bad) will cause the release of inflammatory cytokines until the situation stabilizes.

      Which is why, transiently, people feel their old injuries ‘talk’.

      Last week when I ate my ill-fated okra carrot kimchi and crapped my brains out afterwards, my knees were hurting walking downstairs. It’s just a burst of inflammatory cytokines and should chill out once the guts get used to the change, whatever it is. My knees are fine now.

      I’ve ordered the Prescipt Assist and will be opening the capsules. I am going to gently titrate the dose to see what response occurs. I don’t jump into swimming pools or into showers either. Minimal effective dose is what I’m all about..



    • Alie on March 11, 2014 at 05:35

      Gabriella, thanks for putting a name on it. I had heard that this could happen but was not expecting it. In fact, some symptoms started only an hour after I took the first pill. It makes perfect sense when the gut-mind-body connection is considered.



    • gabriella kadar on March 12, 2014 at 03:24

      Alie, I found this about histamine reactions. Looking back, when I ate that home fermented kimchi, I got red in the face about 15 minutes later, then an hour later everything got pooped out. Probably that was a histamine reaction. But other fermented foods (store bought kimchi) doesn’t do that. Makes me wonder if the Inuit putrid food, when it makes them feel warm, is a type of histamine reaction too. But they like it. Obviously human beings benefit from fermented foods regardless of ‘histamine’. She does write that people with damaged guts react more to fermented foods. If taking SBOs and improving gut function with RS reduces and eliminates ‘histamine’ response, then that’s the right direction to take. We can’t restrict our diets to nothing but ‘fresh meat’ and a ‘few select vegetables’. Why cater to a busted gut? Make it healthy.

      I definitely once had that fish poisoning reaction to grouper, maybe back in the late 70s. The fish didn’t taste ‘off’. Scary. I thought it was a sort of anaphylactic reaction and decided since I was already in bed and it was late at night, that oh well, I guess if this is, then I’m dead so may as well just accept it. Fortunately the symptoms went away after about half an hour but wow. She does say histamine gets broken down quickly so the sensations are short lived.

      She does write at the end that the medical community is not convinced that this reaction exists. Not enough ‘studies’. I think though your experience of feeling better as you continue also confirms that enzymes in the body change and we adapt. It’s not an all or never phenomenon.

      http://diagnosisdiet.com/histamine-intolerance/



    • Alie on March 12, 2014 at 05:46

      Thank you for that info! That fish reaction sounds very scary. Yes, I am feeling better, and after reading the link, I’m pretty convinced it is not histamine, although, honestly, histamine intolerance is probably the path my recent sensitivities would have taken. I feel like I dodged a bullet by stumbling across the RS and SBO info. After two years fairly low carb, I had just started to realize I was becoming more sensitive to foods, not less, as I thought I should be.

      I know that my gut is becoming healthier and hopefully fixed. I don’t know if my situation is somewhat different than others, since much of the “healing crisis” after starting SBO’s was emotional, although the physical symptoms were there as well.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 07:09

      After a few months of LC awhile back, I developed an allergy to shrimp. It went away after eating more starches. This was before RS became a thing, so I wasn’t taking any supplemental RS.

      A leaky gut lets the allergens into the bloodstream. But, somehow people don’t seem to make the connection that if you starve yourself of foods that support the glycosylation of mucin (i.e. carbs) well whadyaknow, your body has trouble producing mucin and you get a leaky gut. Starve yourself of prebiotic fibers and whadyaknow, your microflora have nothing to eat but your mucin and you get a leaky gut. Mucin-degraders, like Akkermansia muciniphila flourish, since mucin is the only food available to the gut bugs, and then you need to live in a bubble.

      So, one of the first benefits of RS is that it feeds the microflora so that they don’t eat you.



    • Charles on March 12, 2014 at 10:26

      Oh THAT”s interesting. One of the better potential insights into what’s going on that I’ve seen here…



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 11:49

      Mucin and mucin-degraders are very interesting. Akkermansia is a mucin-degrader, and seen in high levels in people who are of the thin phenotype (ectomorph).

      There are many articles describing Akkermansia as an anti-obesity microbe, and surmising that fat people need to get Akkermansia implanted in them to get lean. I doubt this will work. Just as in body types, some people naturally secrete more mucin than others, in fact some people hardly secrete any at all. So what happens when a non-secretor gets a bunch of mucin-degraders implanted in them? I can’t imagine it would be healthy.

      As we now know through the RS and animal carb research, there are 3 things that feed gut bugs: Plant matter, animal matter, and mucin. Of these, only RS seems to make a huge difference in gut bug composition. Other plant and animal matter, and even mucin, are certainly important to a healthy ecosystem, but most diets: SAD, vegan, Paleo, LC, VLC, whatever, all leave out one of two important food supplies and rely heavily on mucin and either animal matter or vegetable matter, but NOT RS.

      Perfect Health Diet is probably the first diet to come along that included very much RS, and with just a few minor tweaks can be made very high RS.

      As we’ve seen, simply mega-dosing RS in the form of potato starch may work well for some people, but not all. These same people would probably also not fare well on PHD, either.

      So we add probiotics and other fibers into the mix, clear up any real medical issues in the gut such as parasites and pathogens, and then we have a plan that probably 90%+ of humans will benefit from. There are still lots of unknowns, but keeping a preferred foodsource (RS) away from gut bugs just has to be wrong.



    • Alie on March 12, 2014 at 20:45

      That is incredibly cool with awesomesauce on it. I was wondering why my eyes were so incredibly dry the past few months and I kept getting bloating when low carb and then eating something, or anything actually, with carbs. That is all fixed now even after a short time on RS. N0 more dry eyes and no disproportionate bloating after meals. My skin had been drying out a bit too. I thought that age must be finally catching up with me, since I often get mistaken for being 15-20 years younger than I am. However, since starting RS, it looks like I had a facelift or something. When I catch my reflection in the mirror, I almost look surprised…my eyes are so open. In fact, I went without eye makeup today for the first time in forever because of this.



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 21:00

      I’m printing this.

      Shortly after starting potato starch in earnest a couple months ago, my wife also started using some face wrinkle remover that costs like $100 for a bottle that lasts a month. It was one of those deals where first month is free, you know the spiel.

      Well, everyone comments on how great her skin looks. Of course, it HAS to be from the $100 Nerium and not the $5 potato starch. lol



    • Alie on March 12, 2014 at 21:11

      Or you could do as my husband did and glue the credit cards into my wallet. Silly man…I already had the account numbers and the cvv’s memorized.



  8. Radford McAwesome on March 10, 2014 at 13:09

    Butt-chugging PS? Good or Bad?

    • Alie on March 10, 2014 at 13:22

      This is just my opinion, but you would think after a ba-million-or-so years of evolutionary development we would realize there was a hole that things go in and a hole that things go out. The caveat being, that if something gives you pleasure, then butt-chug away.



    • Dan on March 12, 2014 at 12:42

      Love your open-mindedness there Alie ;).



  9. bornagain on March 10, 2014 at 13:40

    Are all Dave Asprey’s recommendations based off his own (n=1) or does he draw info from the experiences and observations of others? I’ve only seen him talk about his own experience but maybe I’ve missed something.

  10. Adrienne on March 10, 2014 at 14:32

    I was amazed at how many health challenges Dave has struggled with/overcome for a relatively young man. Given his health history, I think it’s likely he might be more sensitive to new foods etc. than other people. I am unclear if he mispoke repeatedly or did he actually use potato and plantain flour instead of the raw starch??? He says “rs” at times, and “flour” at others. Assuming that he did try the correct forms of potato/plantain rs, maybe he is unusually allergic/sensitive. I agree with Mark’s comments that one can incorporate rs within a carbohydrate restricted diet in accordance with each individual’s carb tolerance.

    For those who didn’t listen to the whole interview — fascinating stuff at the beginning about the impact of thoughts on the body — creating disease from thoughts. There’s exciting research being done on the benefits of probiotics and good gut flora on mood/anxiety/depression — but maybe the reverse is true as well — meaning that your thoughts influence the bacteria irrespective of diet, supplements. If people try rs while at the same time are convinced it’s a “dangerous” starch or “poisonous” lectin, then maybe their guts will respond negatively. In other words, smile and think beautiful thoughts when you eat your rs.

    One question out there for those who have tried the soil based products. Mark mentions that our bacterial cells outnumber human cells an etc. Since the SBO’s reproduce differently than the bacteria in normally found in our guts in that they are spore-forming, if a person found a particular SBO product caused adverse effects, how would he or she erradicate them from their body? I looked at the references for a product mentioned here because I was going to try it, and the touted clinical safety study only contained 2 strains — not the many other strains contained in the product being sold. Is the idea of pathogenic spores overtaking the body simply sci-fi paranoi on my part or does anyone else have concerns? Also, when some of the SBO’s get pooped out, how long do they survive? Maybe I watch too many sci-fi horror movies but I’m imaginging these things being pooped out and entering our food chain (good thing if they are in fact good, potentially very bad thing if they are not.)

    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 14:57

      Can’t help but wonder how much of his “lectin” and “mycotoxin” sensitivity is in his head. Reminds me of when Kurt Harris pointed out that people with Orthorexia can give themselves rashes just by expecting them to happen.

      Hate to rail on Asprey, but he’s got to be one of the most sensitive flowers people on the planet and I’m not sure his issues really apply to most people.



    • rob on March 10, 2014 at 15:37

      Imo you should get to know your gut flora on an intimate level.



    • Harriet on March 10, 2014 at 17:51

      His issues might only apply to a few but as one who has come from being sensitive to everything (ALL foods, city water, all perfumes, all petrochemical fumes and anything I could smell, even peaches) I want to hold out hope for anyone in that situation. You can retrain your body. And I would definitely start with the biome. My experience has been that one should go for the “big” impacts rather than cut more and more things out. During the early stages of my body retraining I would meditate in various forms for 2 – 10 hours a day while eating strict meat and potatoes cooked in lots of mutton fat. Get symptoms, meditate. It took about 6 weeks to move from the five foods that gave the most limited symptoms up to about 20 foods (white flour took 11 months, mushrooms about as long – I didn’t know about flour back then).



    • MC on March 10, 2014 at 19:17

      Dave Asprey apparently used to have all the symptoms of aspergers, also OCD I think. But I’m not sure it’s all in his head. He isn’t exactly a normal case. I think he mentioned being seriously overweight in his early teens, had arthritis in both his knees at 14, weighed close to 300 lbs, so yeah, not normal.

      I don’t think he’s imagining mycotoxins effecting him more negatively in his head, I think they actually do effect him more negatively.

      Since he also tries to eat super clean all the time, it’s also more noticable then if you’re constantly getting those toxins all the time anyways.

      “Hate to rail on Asprey”

      Sure you do.



    • EatLessMoveMoore on March 10, 2014 at 19:23

      I agree. I used to consider Richard the ‘Poor Man’s Asprey’ but I’m beginning to think the relationship may be reversed.



    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 20:13

      “Hate to rail on Asprey”

      Sure you do.

      You got me. I hate the cringeworthy marketing plugs for his products and the way he makes listeners believe that they are going to die if they eat a potato or a legume and that they need to buy his hand-labeled products to remain healthy. And the term “Bulletproof” is such an oxymoron. But, I get it. He’s a nice guy and when you spend a quarter million “hacking” your body, you have to try to make some money on the shtick.



    • DuckDodgers on March 10, 2014 at 20:20

      @Adrienne,

      SBOs have a very good track record. As far as any of us know, there’s never been a problem with them:

      https://freetheanimal.com/2014/02/inflammation-potential-diabetes.html#comment-561328



    • MC on March 10, 2014 at 21:07

      Most of his listeners don’t believe they need his products to remain healthy. I don’t think his coffee makes that much of a difference over other coffee. Most probably know the biggest benefit to the coffee recipe he uses is from the grassfed butter and MCT oil. And no, his MCT oil isn’t a thousand times better than other MCT oil out there.

      I think you think the listeners to his podcasts are retarded and in need of your protection or something. I read blogs all the time. I don’t agree with 100% of all of them, because I have a functioning brain. Dave Asprey’s marketing doesn’t make me cringe, cause I’m not going to buy something unless I think I’ll get some benefit out of it, no matter how much it’s advertised.

      Dave Asprey has exaggerated things, and I know in at least two instances from what I remember, just been flat out wrong. But I try not let it get it in the way of some of the more useful stuff on his blog. Somehow I manage to read his blog and this blog and get good information from both without bursting into flames cause I clicked over to FreetheAnimal.

      Yes, the guy is trying to make money off selling things. Woopty fukin do DuckDodgers.

      If the marketing is unbearable, then you’re just a click away from never hearing it again.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 04:33

      MC, I think what I think. Not sure why that bothers you. I think it’s pathetic that every time he talks about RS he whines about his wittle tummy and fails to acknowledge that, oh 90% of the people who use it have great results. So yeah, while he occasionally offers some good advice, I think he does his listeners a tremendous disservice by whining about his over-sensitivities when many of his listeners would benefit from RS.



    • Ray on March 11, 2014 at 05:11

      I think Dave believed he had all these diseases and therefore he did. It’s comical because he really claims he has 100000000 different diseases/disorders. I call bullshit



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 05:53

      Ray, if someone is sick, that’s fine. I feel for them. But, the fact that his side effects are the only thing he is capable of talking about when it comes to RS is what’s total bullshit, IMO. There are people out there who are much, much sicker than Asprey who are figuring out how to “biohack” themselves with RS and overcoming some much worse side effects in the process. That’s what biohackers are supposed to do. They don’t sit around and whine about their symptoms. They talk about the scientific literature. They talk about the mechanisms of the supposed benefits. When they have problems, they suck it up and figure out what the underlying mechanisms are and take steps to eliminate those underlying conditions so that they can tolerate an everyday food.

      A real “biohacker” wouldn’t rush to avoid/eliminate/purify the allergenic properties of every product he or she touches. A real biohacker would figure out why they are having allergenic reactions to something that nobody else seems to have.

      Smells more like a ruse to launch an impurity-free “bulletproof” starch.



    • Lanie on March 11, 2014 at 07:50

      “I think it’s pathetic that every time he talks about RS he whines about his wittle tummy and fails to acknowledge that, oh 90% of the people who use it have great results.”

      As someone who had a terrible response to potato starch, I can tell you it’s a lot less fun for me to talk about my experience here than it is for those who have had favorable results. It’s called sampling bias. You all are in, and I’m out. I’m pretty sure I’m not alone.



    • tatertot on March 11, 2014 at 09:09

      Lanie – I hear you. We have been pretty fair to people who can’t handle potato starch, and there have been a good number. From the very beginning, the premise was to highlight that potato starch had prebiotic qualities, not that potato starch was a miracle cure or wonder drug.

      If you go back to the very first posts, we were just looking for a way to take advantage of RS, a substance that had been studied for 30 years in humans and animals and was shown to completely change gut biomes into healthier places through mechanisms like pH, SCFA, butyrate, insulin sensitivity, bifidobacteria, lactic acid, hunger hormones, immune system, etc….

      I know it must suck to read about people who tolerate potato starch well and get immediate benefits when you try and it doesn’t work. To me, that should be an indication that something is amiss, but pinpointing it may be difficult. If my wife takes penicillin, she will immediately break into whole-body hives, yet penicillin is a wonder-drug of sorts that has saved countless lives.

      I’m a bit dismayed that so many have turned this entire RS conversation from “benefits of RS on healthy intestinal microbiome” to “Potato starch is stooopid”.

      The very first RS post we did just mentioned briefly that potato starch was rich in RS and should be a good item to supplement with if one wanted to get more RS in their diet. I am very glad that there are other visionary scientists and doctors who have looked beyond potato starch and to the mechanisms behind RS and the benefits of having a healthy gut biome. There are many other forms of RS than potato starch–other starches, real foods. In fact, I spent hours and hours scouring the literature to come up with the massive RS Food List that’s somewhere in an old post, and we highlighted that plenty of RS could be had through the diet with a few simple tweaks.

      The failures on potato starch have been just as helpful to everyone as the successes, and with the help of Dr. Grace and others, we’ve been exploring the reasons for the failures and broadened our recommendations to include probiotics and other fibers to help seed the gut with the beneficial microbes needed to get a healthy gut.

      Who knows, maybe one day a potato starch tolerance test will be developed to test gut microbes, or supplements will be developed that deliver prebiotics in the exact proportions needed to feed individual guts, but until then, we are doing these experiments at the street-level and showing the world that changes in food can have big impacts on gut health.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 10:00

      The failures on potato starch have been just as helpful to everyone as the successes.

      ^ ^ ^
      This.

      I think if Dave connected the dots, he’d probably see that he has a mucus deficiency in his intestines, which would explain why his stomach is so sensitive to lectins. The paradox is that if he does have a mucus deficiency, he probably needs to eat more safe starches to repair that deficiency (increasing safe starches promotes mucin glycosation). The “Bulletproof” motto seems to be to cut carbs and just accept a weak stomach by buying expensive purified products. Whereas people who eat more safe starches seem to find ways to improve their gut lining and can live a normal life. Go figure.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 10:08

      …and frankly it shouldn’t be surprising that he probably has a mucus deficiency. He admitted that going too low carb gave him a mucus deficiency and leaky gut right in his RS post. And when one doesn’t eat many fermentable carbs, the flora it just promotes mucin-degrading bacteria.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 10:31

      Case in point:

      Dave Asprey said:

      I do not believe it’s optimal to be on a zero-carbohydrate diet for long periods of time. I went for a little more than three months of eating a single serving of vegetables each day. The rest was fat, Bulletproof Coffee, and grass-fed meat. The results were disastrous. My sleep quality went away, I had dry eyes and dry sinuses because I lacked the starch necessary to make mucus, and it also gave me a leaky gut which resulted in several new food allergies. Most people do better on some low toxin carbohydrate, as long as they experience ketosis frequently, which is why the Bulletproof Diet is a cyclical ketogenic diet. Could resistant starch let us stay in ketosis longer without the downside of a zero-carb diet?

      It’s odd that he would equate cyclical ketosis as being a cure for a low carb-enduced mucin deficiency when he seems to have a lot of allergies and sensitivities that are likely related to mucin issues and a leaky gut.

      To answer his question… No. Eating purified RS while avoiding carbs does not improve the glycosylation of mucins. It’s like he can’t even connect his own dots.



    • Adrienne on March 11, 2014 at 10:33

      Are there human studies — long or short-term – that involve more than one or two strains? Feeling better could be temporary (as some critics of sbos claim); placebo; or in fact evidence of real benefits. The fact that they reproduce differently than bacteria normally found in the human gut gives me cause to pause. Others may be perfectly fine with this and that is their choice. There has been long-term human studies on the safety and efficacy of the usual strains found in the traditional probiotic supplements. But some people are still dubious of those and prefer to simply eat a variety of fermented foods or unwashed organic veggies/fruits,etc. The crucial message here is that resistant starch along with pre and probiotics have very real health benefits — but there are many ways to Rome.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 10:46

      Adriene,

      People have been taking SBOs for over a decade and there hasn’t been a single reported problem with them. That’s a very good track record. And whether we like it or not, the soil-based Actinobacteria are a major component of the human gut (see image on that link which shows they are more numerous than lactic acid bacteria).

      As best as I can tell, the concerns that have been raised about SBOs appears to be unfounded fear-mongering from the dairy-based probiotic industry.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 10:49

      Are there human studies — long or short-term – that involve more than one or two strains?

      Yes. But, you’ll need to do your own homework. If you look at the web pages for AOR Probiotic 3 and Prescript-Assist (just as an example), I believe you’ll see that some of those studies have been listed.



    • Marc on March 11, 2014 at 11:32

      + 1 Duckie.
      Excellent.

      Love Sisson, never gave Asprey any attention, I “love”Sisson cause he’s a good, fair and smart business man.

      I think many forget that Sisson…. And the Likes of Asprey are commercial enterprises. Don’t worry about it. Buy if you want…walk on if you don’t.

      Marc



    • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2014 at 11:54

      “unwashed organic veggies/fruits,etc.”

      What in the eff do you think SBOs are? Aliens?



    • gabriella kadar on March 11, 2014 at 12:02

      Duck, Asprey doesn’t look too healthy. He can barely keep his eyelids up. He has to raise his eyebrows and forehead to get his eyes to open. Otherwise they are just hanging there. Remember about better eye muscle strength with potato starch?

      But I think he’s probably got a thyroid problem anyway. He claims to have a testosterone ‘problem’.



    • Amy on March 11, 2014 at 12:50

      Many of his listeners *may* benefit.

      I don’t know if you can expect someone to recommend something if they’re personally had a negative reaction – even if, had they persevered, they *might* eventually develop the biome to deal with those sensitivities?

      I don’t discount the possibility Mr Bulletproof is looking at some marketing opportunity ahead…but if as you say 90 % are having great results then that will speak louder than Dave Asprey ever could hope to? It’ll all come out in the wash. 😀

      Just my opinion but as someone who’s lost 20+ years to severe, chronic illness…I think those lagging in the positive response stakes shouldn’t be put down or considered “the enemy” or as having some kind of ulterior motive, or weakness.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 12:59

      I agree Amy. For the tenth time, I feel bad for anyone who is having problems. But my point is that he says he wants to “discuss RS” (presumably as a “biohacker”) and then he proves incapable of discussing anything except his own sensitivities. 30 years of research on RS, thousands of n=1s, and all he can do is talk about his rashes. Give me a break.



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 13:07

      Anyway, to be clear, the point I’m making here is that the negative reactions that people get from RS are real clues that a true “biohacker” would use to improve and fix themselves.



    • Amy on March 11, 2014 at 13:32

      I couldn’t agree more.
      I guess a guy can have too many bio-hacks on the go and miss the big picture huh!

      Same could probably be said for Jack Kruse’s so called RS hack.



    • gabriella kadar on March 11, 2014 at 13:51

      Amy, I think people should change one thing at a time and always ramp up slowly to see what happens. Some people introduced PS and rice and etc. all at the same time when they hadn’t been eating much in the way of carbs for a long time.

      Obviously it’s not as severe a reaction, but the concentration camp victims died from overdose of protein. They needed to eat starches first to get their bodies used to food. Then gradually the protein could be increased. Think of the gut biome when someone doesn’t feed it as their personal concentration camp victim.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2014 at 16:21

      Gab:

      Go big or go home. 🙂



    • Adrienne on March 11, 2014 at 17:12

      @Richard — I don’t know, but a Romulun and a Klingon were debating that very point recently on Coast to Coast radio show. One felt the SBO’s were effin’ awesome and the other remained unconvinced because it could be a Borg assimilation strategy.



    • gabriella kadar on March 11, 2014 at 17:27

      Richard, you’d never get me to volunteer to dunk into a cold water tub like you’ve got in the backyard. Maybe would get into a freezing lake if a bear of after me.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2014 at 17:41

      Adrienne

      As a die hard Star Trek fan, by no means a Trekie, and a devout follower of George Takei, my lord and gay savior (or is it ‘Gaylord and savior’–only Leon knows), I’ll have to take that under advisement.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2014 at 17:56

      “you’d never get me to volunteer”

      You’re on, G. I’d get you to do surprising things, in person. My rich Alaskan roommate Scott was once talking to a mutual friend as though I wasn’t there, and this is 30 years ago, mind you.

      “Richard is very persuasive.”

      30 years ago.

      Bwahahahhahahhaha!



    • gabriella kadar on March 11, 2014 at 18:42

      In your presence, probably have no choice unless I want to be labeled chicken shit. But on my own, no no no.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 11, 2014 at 18:59

      No no no.

      Not only will I get you to do it, you’ll come away thinking it was the best thing ever. 🙂



    • MC on March 11, 2014 at 20:04

      “MC, I think what I think. Not sure why that bothers you.”

      Yeah, cause I’m the one that’s bothered. I just find it funny how pissed you and others seem at Dave Asprey cause he might have some problems with RS. If you only want to hear how great RS is and ignore everything else, then go ahead. His words haven’t stopped me from trying RS.

      I mean just read the comments on here. Attacking his character, calling him a scam artist, a liar, a delicate flower, greedy, a whiner whining about his tummy, or whatever else.

      But of course those low carbers are the dogmatic ones. Don’t they know RS is the new god?



    • DuckDodgers on March 11, 2014 at 20:47

      MC, we just want someone to actually discuss the research and the mechanisms of RS. He can’t even do that. I suppose that’s too much to ask.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 12:28

      The diet doesn’t restrict RS. It also doesn’t lack in carbs unless you want it to.

      Please. The diet is one of the lowest in fermentable fibers. And Dave is very clear about this:

      Dave Asprey wrote:

      I have been in the “starch is bad” camp but for years but found it unnatural to get below 50 g a day for longer periods of time…

      I believe that having starch constantly present on a daily basis is a bad idea because it will feed bacteria in your gut, and even if you take probiotics, your gut biome is almost hopelessly jacked compared to the way it should be…

      …That’s why I recommend you eat a moderate amount of starch, about 100-150 g, every 3 to 7 days…This will effectively cycle your body in and out of ketosis, avoid overfeeding gut bacteria you don’t want, and provide raw materials for forming tears and mucus.

      He’s purposefully trying to “avoid overfeeding gut bacteria.” It’s embarrassing. I don’t have to tell you how dumb that all sounds says when you say it out loud. How are you expected to ferment SCFAs when you don’t feed your gut bacteria? He actually wrote that eating starches makes your gut biome “hopelessly jacked” — whatever that means.

      100-150g of starch every 3 to 7 days. That’s a mucin starvation diet. And I don’t even have to prove that the “Bulletproof” diet is designed to starve your gut biome because Asprey admits to it when he says, “having starch constantly present on a daily basis is a bad idea because it will feed bacteria in your gut.”

      And guess what happens when you starve your biome the way Asprey recommends? The microbiota just eat your intestinal mucosa for dinner. That likely explains why he’s so sensitive — he probably has one of the leakiest guts of anybody.



    • gabriella kadar on March 12, 2014 at 02:25

      Richard, only with good drugs.



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 12, 2014 at 17:39

      Hi Matt,

      Thank you for your wonderful thoughts! Did you know that I updated PS in the bionic fiber to g banana flour? It has more benefits to reduce infectious pathogens. In the paleo world do you remember this post? It was a million internet years ago…

      Gut dysbiosis and leaky gut are legion imho. I can tell you this because I’ve seen the 16S rRNA data and identify the symptoms (GDX GI FX stool test).

      I would suspect that Dave Asprey is still lacking a ‘bulletproof gut’ from his intolerances to life and fiber, fodmaps and anything fermentable. A ‘failure’ is truly a ‘litmus test’ for gut optimal health.

      Other failures are
      –chronic, longterm extensive flatulence (co-feeders that utilize gases are extinct or missing in quantity)
      –worsening in autoimmunity (joint pain, rash, etc)
      –extreme worsening in GI symptoms (bloating, gas, IBS/constipation, IBS/diarrhea, etc)

      FOS and other fibers can induce all the above for those who are vulnerable. The root cause is colonization of the gut by the inappropriate species — be it commensals, protozoa, fungal (Dave?), parasites or worms. When this occurs at the small intestines (which it inevitably does), then GERD, heartburn, MetSyn and liver problems can arise for some. For others, the symptoms are the above and fiber/FODMAP intolerances.

      Unfortunately VLC and fiber avoidance can mitigate the GI symptoms but not the ROOT CAUSES of the problems — the inappropriate gut microbiome. The wonkiness of the balance microbes needs to be addressed, and not with more potent antibiotics which prevent recovery of many keystone species that are like delicate orchids, requiring nurturing and special food (RS). Too many ‘bad’ species degrades the integrity of gut and immune system. Not enough ‘good’ ones does the same unfortunately. We co-evolved with them for millions if not billions of years.

      The good keystone species:
      –seal the gut, tightening up ‘loose junctions’ as well as knocking off pathogenic species from growing out of hand
      –help digest gluten, casein, oxalates, histamines, FODMAPS, fiber, etc
      –release antifungal compounds to control yeast, Candida and other fungal overgrowths (which LURRRV TO GROW after antibiotics)
      –release AMPs, antimicrobial peptides to prevent pathogenic ‘bad’ ones from taking over and flush them out of the small intestines and colon
      –prime and train the immune system (our microbiota = immunity, seems obvious now)
      –increase their own tribe, eg other ‘good’ keystone players

      A fiber-less diet (Bulletproof, Cordain’s Paleo, strict Whole9, VLC, Atkins, Bernstein, Attia [sans SUPERSTARCH], Volek, etc). See slides 10-14.

      Duncan et al (2007) AEM 73; 1073-1078
      A study was done examining the shift in gut populations with Atkins in obese patients.

      4 very significant anti-inflammatory, longevity associated and butyrate-producing subpopulations are DECIMATED by the fiber/RS-deficient diet
      –Bifido
      –Ruminococci
      –Roseburia
      –F prausnitzii

      From Biagi et al, AGE, 2012: “The decrease
      of both Clostridium cluster XIVa [Ruminococci] and F. prausnitzii
      group members was also correlated to frailty condition,
      hospitalisation, antibiotic treatment and non-steroidal
      anti-inflammatory therapy (Bartosch et al. 2004; van
      Tongeren et al. 2005; Tiihonen et al. 2008; Zwielehner
      et al. 2009)…

      Biagi et al. (2010) provided a deeper view of the
      correlation between the gut microbiota composition
      and the levels of several serum inflammatory markers.
      In their model of an extremely aged and consequently
      compromised microbiota, a rearrangement was observed
      in the population of butyrate producers and
      other bacteria with anti-inflammatory properties, such
      as F. prausnitzii. The resulting dysbiosis may be
      among the causes—or the results—of the proliferation
      of opportunistic enterobacteria, which seemed to be
      positively correlated to an increase in some proinflammatory
      signals (IL-6 and IL-8). The authors
      hypothesised that the age-related proliferation of
      pathobionts could either contribute to inflamm-aging
      or be promoted by the systemic inflammatory status.
      In spite of these recent findings, a direct involvement
      of the autochthonous gut microbiota in the inflammaging
      process has yet to be determined, since it is not
      possible to understand if the observed differences
      between the gut microbiota of older and younger adults
      are either a consequence of the inflammatory status, or
      among its causes. However, it has been recently
      proposed that the age-associated increase in the intestinal
      abundance of Enterobacteriaceae and other gram negative
      bacteria may result in an increased endotoxin
      challenge for the weakened intestinal barrier, ending
      up in an increased stimulation of the inflammatory
      response (Schiffrin et al. 2009a).”



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 19:43

      Grace,

      Those Karen Scott slides were fantastic. Should be required reading for anyone creating dietary recommendations. Terrific find and great summary.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2014 at 08:22

      MC

      Let’s make some distinctions. Dave has claimed sensitivity to potato starch and plantain flower. We don’t know that it’s the resistant starch.

      Second, I got beat up over in his comments on his RS post, so turnabout is fair play, though I’m staying out of it.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 09:13

      It’s probably better to just stick to the facts. Here’s how the conversation on the podcast started:

      Mark Sisson: I wish that I had come out stronger in the last 4 or 5 years, in favor of Resistant Starch, because I always felt that Resistant Starch and feeding the gut biome appropriately was the way to go. And yet, I sort of pulled back and said you know it’s about healthy meat, fish, fowl, eggs, nuts, seeds, vegetables and a little bit of fruit. Now we’re starting to see that the prebiotic aspect of foods is a critical component of the diet and its those soluble fibers, those starches, that make it down through the digestive and feed the 80 trillion little cells in there that are not you. I wish I had taken a stronger position on that. I will now! Because so much research is coming down. I said, you know what, I’m gonna change my stance…

      Dave’s responds by just talking about his rashes on the two “flours” he tried.

      Asprey avoids the topic of feeding the gut biome completely. He either fails to realize that Sisson has just pointed out that the Bulletproof Diet is a gut-biome-starving and mucin-degrading diet, or he just doesn’t want people to pay attention to that glaring problem.

      The Bulletproof diet doesn’t feed the microbiome. And it doesn’t have enough carbs to support mucin glycosation for a healthy gut lining. (The result is a highly sensitive set of followers who become dependent on highly purified foods and supplements. Good for business, bad for health).

      Dave can either change with times and promote the feeding of the microbiome or he can continue to live in fantasyland.



    • MC on March 12, 2014 at 11:41

      @Richard

      “Let’s make some distinctions. Dave has claimed sensitivity to potato starch and plantain flower. We don’t know that it’s the resistant starch.”

      True. I wonder if he can just skip the powdered starch and eat more cold rice, instead. He did not say he has given up on RS.

      “Second, I got beat up over in his comments on his RS post, so turnabout is fair play, though I’m staying out of it.”

      Yeah, but most knew those bashing you about misogyny were plenty retarded. I just wanted to point out the growing levels of retardation amongst some of your commenters.

      @DuckDodgers

      “It’s probably better to just stick to the facts. Here’s how the conversation on the podcast started”

      If by facts you mean ignoring most of their conversation cause you heard something about him getting hives, then sure. You’re preoccupied with only the things that’ll make you dislike the guy.

      So you hear “flour” but ignore the “RAW potato” that came before it. You ignore him linking up his post at the 37:50 mark where he discusses the gut biome because he’s evil and could not possibly want people to know what the gut biome is.

      “The Bulletproof diet doesn’t feed the microbiome. And it doesn’t have enough carbs to support mucin glycosation for a healthy gut lining.”

      The diet doesn’t restrict RS. It also doesn’t lack in carbs unless you want it to. It’s highly customizable, just like a paleo diet. In fact, it is a paleo diet.



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 12:06

      Rhetoric aside, I was very disappointed in Dave’s entire RS biohack. Then, in the podcast, I got the strong feeling that Dave was looking for an ally in Mark Sisson to ‘poo-poo’ RS as a whole.

      Here is this famed bio-hacker, giving a less-than-stellar review of potato starch, but can’t even be bothered to get his terms right. I jumped Richard 3 or 4 times over the past year for mixing up RS2 and RS3, that’s much more forgivable than mixing up starch and flour. It tells me that Dave didn’t put much effort into this bio-hack. What he did was eat something, presumably potato starch, and got a rash. Wasn’t there also a stool sample taken? What were the results of that? And where did he come up with the idea to use the enema? And how much potato starch(?) did he use in his oral or anal biohacks?

      Jack Kruse did a supposed potato starch bio-hack, too. He claims to have taken 80g of potato starch for 6 weeks (which is twice what anybody has ever recommended!) and saw worsened stools, sleep, and labs–including a stool sample–that was never published. He then also claimed to have turned this PS-related health crisis around with 6 weeks of high tree nut consumption.

      I say ‘Bah!’ to both these guys. Clearly after their own agendas.



    • MC on March 12, 2014 at 12:36

      Somebody who is willing to take potato starch as an enema to try and avoid any symptoms taking it orally is more dedicated to getting RS then most. He’s not done with experimenting with RS from what I heard. It was brought up in their conversation, and he gave some of his thoughts on his experiences so far.

      He has not given a final verdict on RS yet. And I don’t think RS interferes with Dave’s agenda one bit. He is just being as thorough with his thoughts on RS as he is with regular coffee, regular butter, CAFO meat, and everything else where quality seems to effect him more then most.



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 12:55

      If that’s the case, I will be happy with his bio-hack, even if it doesn’t work out.

      I do think that nearly every diet plan out there will benefit with a good source of prebiotic fiber that selectively feeds lactic acid producers and increases bifidobacteria. There are certainly more ways to do just that without eating raw potato starch…there’s inulin, FOS, and GOS. These, along with some targeted gut nutrients and other fiber types like pectin, gums, and mucilages, will exhibit the same functional properties as RS, but I have a feeling that any gut health protocol that involves prebiotics and probiotics will benefit with a hefty dose of RS from somewhere.

      RS is the only prebiotic that can be found in large numbers in foods we already eat, inulin, for instance, is found in large quanties in chicory root, Jerusalem artichoke, and dandelion leaves…and small amounts in onion, garlic, and leeks. Refined inulin is available as a supplement, but it is highly refined–not just extracted–and expensive.

      FOS is available as a supplement, but also kind of strange. The terms inulin and FOS are used interchangeably and there’s also long-chain and short-chain FOS, which is also hard to understand, and FOS, like inulin, is olnly available in a few, underrepresented plantfoods.

      GOS is a mandmade prebiotic from cow’s milk that is supposed to closely resemble human breast milk oligosaccharides. It’s only available in Europe (as far as I know) unless you want to drink baby formula.

      There are other prebiotic fibers, almond skin for instance, that seems to stimulate LAB and bifido…and there are certainly others out there that haven’t been identified. but one thing is clear from the studies, these prebiotics all work better when combined with RS. So, if one doesn not (or cannot) tolerate potato starch or plantains, they will have to start including RS rich foods (potatoes, rice and beans) in their diet.



    • Matt on March 12, 2014 at 12:56

      Duck,

      You just nailed it, because I’m living proof of what can go wrong following the Bulletproof diet.

      Having zero digestive issues for most of my 26 years, I wrecked my gut following this diet. Looking to improve cognitive function, I followed Mr. Asprey’s advice. At first everything was firing on all cylinders. Zero crashes, no digestive problems. Then after 4 months, I developed all the tell tale signs of leaky gut and gut dybiosis.

      Since stumbling upon this blog and Tater Tots work on the AnimalPharm site, I’ve implemented the RS bionic protocol. I really hope I can report that I’ve turned this thing around. Btw, loved your piece on the Inuit and Masei.



    • MC on March 12, 2014 at 13:10

      “He’s purposefully trying to “avoid overfeeding gut bacteria.””

      I think he’s stating that feeding the wrong gut bacteria is not good for you. Which is why he even said in his interview with Mark that a fecal transplant of somebody with good bacteria is what he might look into next.

      “100-150g of starch every 3 to 7 days. That’s a mucin starvation diet”

      It’s 100-150g every 3-7 days on top of 30-80 the other non starch refeed days. I eat at least one sweet potato a day, two if the potato isn’t big enough. And eat more on days I work out, and refeed days usually contain white rice along with sweet potatoes. Feel free to prove that’s mucin starvation, but I would say I follow Bulletproof guidelines pretty well, and if I don’t, then I don’t care.

      “I don’t even have to prove that the “Bulletproof” diet is designed to starve your gut biome because Asprey admits to it when he says, “having starch constantly present on a daily basis is a bad idea because it will feed bacteria in your gut.””

      Funny how “because Dave Asprey said so” is perfectly fine when it serves your purpose. So I’m guessing you’re on board with everything else he said in that post too? Because he also said the Bulletproof diet allows you to have plenty of mucus to protect the lining of your gut and I don’t have to prove the diet doesn’t lead to mucin starvation cause Asprey said the diet is designed to prevent that in his post. Right?



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 13:38

      I think he’s stating that feeding the wrong gut bacteria is not good for you.

      Not what he said. He was very clear on that. He said, “Starch constantly present on a daily basis is a bad idea because it will feed bacteria in your gut, and even if you take probiotics, your gut biome is almost hopelessly jacked”.

      He just pulled that out of his ass. It doesn’t even make any sense.

      It’s 100-150g every 3-7 days on top of 30-80 [g] the other non starch refeed days.

      That’s hardly anything. Sisson recommends a lot more than that. Hence Dave’s overly sensitive and leaky gut.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 13:59

      Because he also said the Bulletproof diet allows you to have plenty of mucus to protect the lining of your gut and I don’t have to prove the diet doesn’t lead to mucin starvation cause Asprey said the diet is designed to prevent that in his post. Right?

      If you’re willing to take his word and accept the consequences, then I guess you don’t need to prove it. I just don’t know why you would take his word. It’s not like there’s any good evidence backing up his assertion that it’s enough to prevent a leaky gut. His inability to overcome his sensitivities should be a warning flag that his diet isn’t engineered to heal gut issues.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 14:17

      But frankly MC, as Sisson pointed out, there’s just too much literature that tells us that there is a tremendous need for fermentable fibers in the diet. For instance, are you familiar with the “carbohydrate gap”?

      David L Topping and Peter M Clifton said:

      “The “carbohydrate gap” is the discrepancy between NSP intakes and calculations of bacterial activity of the large bowel microflora and supports a significant contribution by RS. Individuals in affluent westernized countries may consume up to 28 g NSP/day. However, much larger quantities, possibly as much as 80 g, of fermentable carbohydrate are needed to sustain the biomass and account for SCFA production, and NSP may only provide 25% of that requirement. […]

      “In humans, RS and OS could close the carbohydrate gap, but consumption of OS appears to be self-limiting due to osmotic effects and may contribute only 5–10 g/day.”

      Here’s another explanation of the carbohydrate gap:

      Teresa M Paeschke and William R Aimutis said:

      In the large bowel, resistant starch is a highly fermentable dietary fiber. In fact, resistant starch is believed to be the most significant contributor to colonic short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) production (Bird et al., 2000, Toping and Clifton, 2001). This is based on estimations that 60-80g/day of fermentable substrate are needed to sustain the metabolism of the colonic microbiota; yet dietary fiber consumption in Westernized countries is rarely above 20 g/day (Institute of Medicine, 2002a). Oligosaccharides, endogenous secretions, and indigestible protein may contribute some fermentable substrate, but resistant starch is believed to contribute to the majority of this “carbohydrate gap” (Topping et al., 2003, Nugent, 2005).

      In other words, you need to eat a ton of fermentable fibers every day just to maximize your SCFA production. Dave doesn’t get that. His statements suggests he’s unfamiliar with the research on this. That’s why we’re disappointed in him. It all seems to be over his head and he doesn’t seem interested in having an intelligent conversation about it.

      Dave is standing at a cross-roads. He can choose to learn about the importance of fermentable and promote internal SCFA fermentation, or he can ignore it at the expense of his followers’ health.



    • gabriella kadar on March 12, 2014 at 14:50

      Agreed about Dave and other low carb advocates.

      But 80 grams is a lot! Wow.



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 15:13

      NSP is celluloses, hemicelluloses, gums, pectins, xylans, mannans, glucans and mucilages. Basically, indigestible plant matter. They’ve estimated you’d need to ingest 80g of NSP in order to get the required fermentable fibers needed to produce enough butyrate for your gut to be healthy. Not all NSP is fermentable, you need about 40g of fermentables to produce the butyrate you need.

      I think what they were getting at with the 80g figure was that it would take about 80g of total fiber to get the required 40g of fermentable fiber. Coprolite studies showed paleo ancestors ate around 130g of NSP per day.

      40g of RS also produces the required butyrate. We crunched some numbers and if you ingest between 20-40g of RS rich foods, you will also be getting about 5g of OS (a fermentable NSP) and 10g of FOS (another fermentable NSP), which is right in the sweet spot of what the ‘Carb Gap’ studies propose.



    • gabriella kadar on March 12, 2014 at 15:31

      Good, because otherwise, it’s dirigible time. Crikey! I totally appreciate you’ve done the biohack and the potato starch is good. But without also eating high fibre vegetables, the potato starch is not enough. I’ve determined n=1 that two cups of veggies makes for perfect. I mean asparagus, sweet potatoes (real ones not Louisana yams), plantains, okra etc. Lettuce doesn’t cut it. Oh yeah, tomatoes, winter squash, cucumbers…. all work great.



    • Sarabeth Matilsky on March 13, 2014 at 07:31

      I’m going through those interesting slides here , and I know I should know this (but I don’t): how much do the non-resistant starches (the digestible starches, sugars, etc.) impact our gut flora? Are they all ideally absorbed before food gets to the colon, or (either in case of SIBO, or normally) do they feed some kinds of colonic fermenters as well?



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 20:23

      What I take away from those slides is that you really can’t say that RS is ‘better’ than other fermentable fibers, but a diet devoid of both or either is obviously not the best for our guts. A diet with both RS and other fermentable and nonfermentable fibers is a diet for the gut. Someone should write a book!



    • MC on March 12, 2014 at 20:49

      @DuckDodgers

      “Not what he said. He was very clear on that. He said, “Starch constantly present on a daily basis is a bad idea because it will feed bacteria in your gut, and even if you take probiotics, your gut biome is almost hopelessly jacked”.”

      “Even if you take probiotics(good bacteria) your gut biome is almost hopelessly jacked(full of bad bacteria). It’s exactly what he said. Not to mention he restated that in the Sisson interview.

      “That’s hardly anything. Sisson recommends a lot more than that. Hence Dave’s overly sensitive and leaky gut.”

      Sisson recommends 50-100 if trying to lose weight, 100-150 to maintain. And is it really “hardly anything” to eat 100-150 every 3-7 days, and 30-8o every non refeed day? I don’t include most vegetables as a carb since they generally are too low to bother counting, and I don’t include RS as a carb either or fiber cause they don’t behave like typical carbs.

      I don’t personally see myself developing leaky gut, I’m not zero carbing it, or eating only salads.

      “If you’re willing to take his word and accept the consequences, then I guess you don’t need to prove it.”

      You completely misunderstood what I said.

      “are you familiar with the “carbohydrate gap”? In other words, you need to eat a ton of fermentable fibers every day just to maximize your SCFA production.”

      Not gonna lie. I’m completely ignorant on SCFA production and what it means, does, etc. I’m taking 2 TBS of RS, on top of whatever carbs I’m eating. So no idea if I’m meeting those requirements, I can always up the RS.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2014 at 21:11

      “Someone should write a book!”

      Indeed.



    • DuckDodgers on March 12, 2014 at 22:01

      Cool. Glad to hear we’re finally discussing details! Although Dave defines “zero carb” as literally no carbs, “zero carb” can also be defined as anything below 50g of starch/day. And many people consider any carbs from non-starchy vegetables to be negative net carbs (you burn more energy digesting them than you get from them).

      Here, take a look at this:

      Dangers of Zero-Carb Diets, II: Mucus Deficiency and Gastrointestinal Cancers

      Paul Jaminet dissects the “Optimal Diet” in that link. The Optimal Diet was developed 40 years ago and it was 60 g protein – 180 g fat – 30 g carbohydrate per day. It’s considered to be a “zero carb” diet. And after 15-20 years, the people who ate that diet came down with alarming rates of gastrointestinal cancers. Even the president of the Polish Optimal Dieters’ Association came down with stomach cancer. Massive glucose deficiencies and mucus deficiencies.

      So, Jaminet recommends 150g of starch/day for virtually everybody to maintain gut health. And what we see with the PHD is that people’s guts heal very nicely. It appears to cure a wide range of ailments and diseases. You don’t see that kind of recovery with the Bulletproof Diet because that’s not what it’s trying to achieve. The Bulletproof Diet is mainly about brain hacking, not overall health.

      As Paul put it:

      It’s plausible that a zero-carb diet that included at least 600 calories per day protein for gluconeogenesis would not elevate gastrointestinal cancer risks as much as the Optimal Diet. But why be the guinea pig who tests this idea?

      It’s a good question. You are braver than I.



    • Jim on March 12, 2014 at 22:14

      This all seems so neurotic. Tender care of gut bugs is the primary focus of a healthy life style?

      You do understand that you will be taking a dirt nap sooner or later? Why worry about this kind of BS? Go take a hike and live a little! Life is a miracle! Enjoy it while you can!

      Fuck the gut bugs!

      I certainly have better things



    • Richard Nikoley on March 12, 2014 at 22:21

      “This all seems so neurotic.”

      Well let me just jump right up and pay attention to what Jim has to say.

      Or, not.

      Fact is, it’s plain easy and fun. If I was as ignorant as Jim, I’d say the same thing. We all bask in ignorance, one way or another.



    • tatertot on March 12, 2014 at 22:22

      And when you are shitting in your diaper or changing your colostomy bag, I will be hiking and glad I took the extra 30 seconds to mix a bit of potato starch in my smoothie.

      Or we both get hit by a car tomorrow.



    • MC on March 12, 2014 at 23:01

      “Paul Jaminet dissects the “Optimal Diet” in that link. The Optimal Diet was developed 40 years ago and it was 60 g protein – 180 g fat – 30 g carbohydrate per day. It’s considered to be a “zero carb” diet. And after 15-20 years, the people who ate that diet came down with alarming rates of gastrointestinal cancers.”

      There’s a great difference between 30 carbs a day, everyday, indefinitely, and 100-150 carbs every 3-7 days, with 30-80 carbs on non refeed days, not including vegetables, fiber, and RS.

      There’s a good possibility that the 3o carbs indefinitely crowd could have prevented their problems with a single refeed once a week alone, but we’ll never know. At only 30 carbs a day they were likely not eating any starch at all. But if you’re suggesting we’d develop stomach cancer unless we had at least 150 carbs a day, everyday, indefinitely, then I don’t think we would have survived as a species under those conditions.

      My guess is that it’s a lot easier to just tell people to eat 150 everyday, than tell them to vary carb intake day to day. Some days 60-80, one or two days 100-150, some days 30-50, some days under 30, some days over 150.

      “You don’t see that kind of recovery with the Bulletproof Diet because that’s not what it’s trying to achieve. The Bulletproof Diet is mainly about brain hacking, not overall health.”

      The diets are very similar. With very similar results. The problem with the Bulletproof diet, is that it is very customizable. So I guess if you want to, you can try and make it suck.



    • GTR on March 13, 2014 at 16:12

      @DuckDodgers – Dave Asprey’s diet seems to include a lot of fiber – his lunch is basically steamed vegetables (brocolli, asparagus, califlower etc. – high fiber vegetables). This is totally different than optimal diet, which dissed all plant foods, and their ideal is almost all animal food.

      From 20 min to 23 min.

      He also eats xylitol as his main sweetner, various herbal spices etc.



    • K on March 13, 2014 at 06:34

      Duck, can you clarify “starch” and “carbs”?

      I’ve eating a low-ish carb diet for years ~120g of total CHO/day, with refeeds of ~200g total CHO on heavy lifting days (2-3x/week). Most of that was from green veggies and fruit and nuts/seeds/dark chocolate, typically providing 30-40g/day of those carbs from fiber (so ~80g net carbs, if we’re counting that way). Refeeds are things like sweet potatoes and bananas, sometimes sushi rice, which don’t add much fiber. Protein is usually 200-250g/day (more on refeed days) and fat stays pretty constant at about ~100g/day.

      Is that not enough for gut bugs because of the lack of starch, even though the carb content is far above “zero” carb/keto? Does mucin specifically require *starch* or just *carbs*? And what about fiber in the from greens/veggies (e.g. broccoli)/nuts/seeds (e.g flax) – does that “count” towards the starch/gut bug food total? Or is starch – as opposed to any other type of CHO – specifically required?



    • DuckDodgers on March 13, 2014 at 06:39

      if you’re suggesting we’d develop stomach cancer unless we had at least 150 carbs a day, everyday, indefinitely, then I don’t think we would have survived as a species under those conditions.

      Low carbers always fall back to that argument, but the fact of the matter is that no indigenous culture was ever found to be ketogenic unless they were in a fasted unfed state. Every culture ate plenty of carbs whenever they were available. Ketogenesis is a form of starvation. So, this idea that ketogenesis is somehow natural or good for us isn’t based on any real evidence.

      Secondly the differences you are poo-pooing are cumulative. They don’t cause problems in a day or a week. Most low carbers who have issues (and many people do have issues with low carb) happen after a year or more. It’s a cumulative effect.

      After a year of each diet, on a “maintenance” level of carbs, the numbers look like this:

      Optimal: 10,950g carbs/year
      Asprey: 16,120g to 36,920g carbs/year
      Sisson: 36,400g to 54,600g carbs/year

      Asprey’s “high” end falls within Sisson’s recommendations for ideal health, so that looks fine. But Asprey’s low end is awfully close to the Optimal Diet, which implies that some “Bulletproofers” may be susceptible to GI cancer. Typically these cancers happen on a bell curve. How does Dave know that his low end is enough to eliminate GI cancer? He doesn’t. He’s just focussed on staying in ketogenesis

      And finally, as I keep saying, Dave’s ongoing sensitivities implies that he is unable to heal his gut with his diet. That should be a warning flag. You don’t seem to want to acknowledge that. Feels like your head is in the sand about that one.



    • tatertot on March 13, 2014 at 07:47

      I’ve read that about 10% of all the digestible carbs we eat, and a similar portion of fat and protein, get to the colon undigested and contribute to feeding gut flora. This is a big part of what keeps gut flora living, but it does not result in targeting the beneficial species that RS and inulin/FOS/GOS do.

      I doubt that undigested food impacts us negatively or positively.



    • DuckDodgers on March 13, 2014 at 08:12

      And these “refeeds” have never been proven to be effective at re-blooming gut flora to my knowledge.

      I’m sure tatertot, grace, gab or others can expound on that better than I can, but I’m fairly certain that dumping a larger quantity of starches/fibers into the gut once or twice a week does not have the same effect as a continuous feed with the occasional fast for regulation. They are two very different things in terms of flora response.

      We now know that feeding lots of fiber to “empty zoo cages” does nothing. So, one would expect the same thing on a diet that starves the bacteria (Dave’s words, not mine) with refeeds once or twice a week. Most likely the “Bulletproof” diet is just feeding dwindled and empty zoo cages when those magical “refeeds” happen, which would do absolutely nothing.

      If anything the bacteria are far more adapted to eating mucin than starches by that point.



    • Adrienne on March 13, 2014 at 08:19

      Does anyone think it’s possible that genetic variants in mucin gene expression may account for how various people respond to various levels of long term carbohydrate restriction?



    • Sarabeth Matilsky on March 13, 2014 at 08:26

      Thanks, Tatertot! 🙂 That’s very interesting, about 10% of carbs making their way down to the colon…

      I do agree, that probably in a healthy person, 10% is fine.

      I also theorize that in the case of a severely dysbiotic person (like my son was, when he was six and we started a GAPS-type protocol to basically starve as many gut pathogens as possible), that 10% might be greatly increased (due to maldigestion in general), and also I wonder whether increasing RS/prebiotics/probiotics alone could shape the microbe populations enough to heal that person’s gut.

      No way to know, really, but I think about it often, while I try to squelch my perfectionist and wishful tendencies. (It’s very easy to metaphorically slap myself and think, “If only I’d discovered RS two years ago, maybe I could have stabilized my son’s digestion then! Maybe we excluded too many carbohydrates for too long!” But the reality was that whenever I introduced what I thought was the logical next, “more advanced” food, like fruit or nuts or even new types of fermented foods, he’d get diarrhea. And I just didn’t know about resistant starch at all, so no way I could have tried it…)

      But anyway, in the course of the past four years, on what I now realize was a very low-net-carb diet, I would try to introduce “new” foods to my son’s meals, over and over. Of course, I’d think then, there’s no way he could tolerate even more advanced, “actual” starch, which is just longer chains of these obviously indigestible sugars all bound together, right?!

      Now I wonder whether a combination approach would have worked better, if I could go back in time, and perhaps the dietary carbs – introduced earlier than four years after starting GAPS – would have helped in other ways beyond the RS component.

      Therapeutically, I’m thinking: First, a course of time “starving” the microbes a la GAPS, and then, after less time than the four years we spent (maybe two years?), introducing more carbohydrates in a specific order to promote the good bugs PLUS more stability (the latter is what pushed me to researching and finding RS, because my son’s gut has seemed so fragile, even though he’s so SO much healthier and less autistic).

      I’m thinking that the order of carbohydrate introduction I’d try, in the context of a super-nutrient-dense diet, would be:

      1. Well-cooked and fermented non-sweet and non-starchy vegetables of all types, gradually working up to more-fibrous ones (artichokes, etc.)

      2. Cooked sweet vegetables like carrot, winter squash, etc.

      3. Raw vegetables, if tolerated.

      4. Fruit, if tolerated.

      5. Resistant starch in supplemental form, whether or not #s 3. and 4. were working out.

      And then…I’d be so curious, if I’d done this, whether my son could have then been able to eat (like he has been, in the past month) starchy vegetables like sweet potato, plantain, white rice, etc.

      I’m very curious what other folks have found, when coming from a state of severe dysbiosis (IBS, ASD, etc.), and then trying to incorporate RS. I often wish for a control group for my life! 🙂



    • tatertot on March 13, 2014 at 08:59

      I think it is extremely likely.

      Approximately 25% of the population are ‘non-secretors’ of fucose, a component of mucin that feeds gutbugs. You can find your status by paying the 23andMe people $99 and a cup of your spit.

      What’s strange is that non-secretors are pretty much immune from norovirus and HIV. I don’t know as much as I should but this secretor status is tied to blood-type and is somewhat the basis for the blood-type diets you see.



    • tatertot on March 13, 2014 at 09:10

      No idea.

      Intuitively it seems that a steady supply of preferred foods, RS, inulin-like fructans, and FOS/OS would be the best, but a healthy gut biome is very resilient. As long as the gut bugs are there, they can probably survive periods of starvation and less-than-ideal food sources, but in a modern gut that has been scrubbed by antibiotics and is missing key species…who knows.

      More than the gut bugs themselves, a bigger concern is the colonocytes which line the gut and contain Peyer’s Patches and other key components of our immune system. When starved of butyrate they normally get from RS and fermentable fibers, they will switch to burning glucose from the blood. This is a ‘fallback’ food and they are less healthy and less resilient when fueled by glucose. Their apoptosis mechanism gets switched off and colonocyte cells don’t regenerate like healthy, butyrate-fed cells. I wrote about it last fall on Grace’s blog when a study came out about all this:

      url-removed/2013/11/fat-burning-beast-sugar-burning-gut.html



    • Sarabeth Matilsky on March 13, 2014 at 09:45

      Thanks, Tim!

      I’m appreciating The Fat and Sugar Burning Beast post. 🙂
      And the comment thread. I wish wish wish I could go back ten years in time and do a lot of things differently, for my son and the rest of us. But then…I guess I wouldn’t be here! Which is a good place to be, ’cause we’re not dead yet, and there’s a lot of Possibility ahead, if the bus doesn’t mow us down tomorrow.



    • Chupo on March 13, 2014 at 09:53

      Very interesting. I’m a non-secretor. I didn’t know it had anything to do with feeding gut bugs but it makes sense.



    • K on March 13, 2014 at 10:39

      My refeeds were for cyclical glycogen replenishment (been doing paleo/IF since ~06, long before anything “bulletproof” came on the scene). Personally, I remember some of my best digestion (e.g. TMI) was when I was eating the *least* amount of starch – but tons of leafy greans and nuts and seeds. I don’t have an appendix anymore (the appendectomy was what prompted me to try paleo) so I’m fairly sensitive to digestive troubles. Lately, lots of starch from things like squash and sweet potatoes doesn’t seem to do anything good in terms of digestion (even in the presence of RS supplementation), so that’s why I ask.

      The question I have is what is the role of starch vs other types of carbs in mucin production? And what about RS vs. digestible starch?



    • Adrienne on March 13, 2014 at 10:54

      @Tatertot. Thanks — your comment led me to interesting article on fucose secretors and non-secretors at http://evolutionmedicine.com/2013/02/16/fucose-is-not-a-dirty-word/



    • Chris Woods on March 13, 2014 at 15:21

      Hi Grace. Always great information. We’ve conversed about Apoe 4/4 stuff on your blog before. You make so much sense on these topics.

      Anyway, let’s say I have a friend who is having continued flatulence on PS that is somewhat confounded by raw garlic (1 close 2-3x per day) and beans (small serving once per day).

      You mention that here many some co-feeders missing. I have done some searching for “my friend” and can’t seem to uncover what those might be and if there are any ways of getting more of those into “his system”. Can you point me in the right direction for “him”.

      BTW, I have occasionally had headaches as well if that leads you to any better conclusion about the methods/directions you would suggest.

      Thanks!



    • tatertot on March 13, 2014 at 15:28

      Not Grace, but I’d say if your friends gas is giving you headaches, maybe you should leave the room.

      There–I fixed your problem, we’ll see if Grace can help your friend.



    • Chris Woods on March 13, 2014 at 15:29

      Great advice. But I can’t seem to get away from him 🙂



    • DuckDodgers on March 13, 2014 at 16:57

      @GTR. Right, but the “carbohydrate gap” still applies, no?



    • Richard Nikoley on March 13, 2014 at 17:08

      K

      have you seen the recent research that hypothesizes the role of the appendix (this about the name it was given and wonder) is as a reservoir safe house for gut microbes, to reseed the gut after an avalanche?

      Certainly makes evolutionary sense.



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 13, 2014 at 17:18

      Thx DuckDodgers~!! LUV all of your comments and illuminating observations



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 13, 2014 at 17:20

      There are conflicting biases when concerns are raised by ‘industries’ whether they are selling pharmaceuticals or LAB/bifido™ probiotic. BTW i’m not selling anything (yet LOL)



    • DuckDodgers on March 13, 2014 at 17:21

      That’s awesome, Richard. I had always heard the appendix was the tip of our former large caecums that shriveled up from our herbivore ancestors.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermiform_appendix#Vestigiality

      The caecums are where plant matter traditionally goes for fermentation (i.e. where all the gut microbes would reside) and herbivores have huge caecums (which humans lack). So, that makes a lot of sense.



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 13, 2014 at 17:29

      Chris Woods ~ Good to see u here. Your friend empirically speaking appears to need SBOs in a safe manner. The range of SBOs are ideal either from a probiotic or healthy dirt exposures.
      –Can he volunteer at a local garden or CSA that is organic or biodynamic?
      –Any of the SBOs we discuss sound worthy of trial — Prescript Assist, Swanson’s, AOR, Primal Defense, NOW, etc
      –Have you tried an SBO for the headaches? Fluids? Mag adequate? Too much vitamin D which depletes mag and zinc unless there are balanced?



    • K on March 13, 2014 at 17:30

      I have, and no doubt the loss of that is largely responsible for my digestive trouble (though bad digestion runs in my family and I wouldn’t say it was great when I was a kid either). Of course, my appendectomy was performed alongside huge amounts of levaquin antibiotics, so I started from scratch there too. That ship has sailed, unfortunately, so I guess I’m stuck with trying to always keep good bugs healthy and satisfied and probably just have less room for error than your average person. Certainly probiotics will be 100% necessary for me following any type of food poisioning or antiobiotic regimen, whereas maybe someone with an appendix could bounce back if everything else was right.

      I’d love to get some clarity on this starch/carbs issue, as I notice that certain foods seem to be necessary for me to have good “TMI” as it were, along with gut bacteria from probiotics. I’m pretty sure I’ve struggled with mucin deficiency off and on, depending on what I’m eating. I’ve spent a few years trying to put together all the pieces and figure out what will work best long term. Duck dodgers, please see my comment – I’d love your thoughts.



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 13, 2014 at 17:50

      We now have the science and data to make ‘data-informed’ decisions and monitor inputs/outputs. The Genova diagnostic lab testing should be a must for all physicals, ailments and health assessments IMHO. Unfortunately I’m impatient that the current solutions don’t rival the diagnostic technology. SCD and and other low fermentable fiber diets are not decent long-term solutions though they are adept at introducing the core commensals via fermented foods, they cannot sustain them well without FOS, oligos, and RS containing foods as Karen Scott’s slides illustrate.



    • Sarabeth Matilsky on March 13, 2014 at 18:19

      Hi Grace,

      Thank you, by the way, for your perspective and ideas, which I’ve only just discovered in the past two months, and are really, really interesting and useful.

      I love the idea of “data-driven” diagnostics and treatment, but I can’t help but feel like this is a long way off, practically-speaking (at least for more complicated cases). Antibiotics used to be (and often still are, unfortunately) perceived as a means to this end, but it really really feels like we are only scratching the surface on what will be known, even within the next decade or two, about what’s going on in our guts. For now, it’s so easy (for me, at least!) to jump to conclusions.

      I also think that SCD and GAPS-type diets are somewhat blunt instruments – but at least they are _diets_, without a decent version of which I am pretty doubtful that any treatment will work. (I have no idea what the heck my son expelled during his first few weeks sans fermentable carbohydrate intake…but it was pretty incredibly horrible! We saw the gut-microbe/brain/behavior connection graphically illustrated in spring 2010 (along with its attendant huge complexity) over the course of only a couple of days on “GAPS.” Back then, and now, I continued to wish for more understanding, at the same time that I recognized that most of the important work was crisis management and cooking…)

      Anyway. I am really interested to see what you intelligent and curious folks come up with in terms of solutions, because you already are discovering so many interesting puzzle pieces. Over the past four years, I have been frustrated by countless alternative health practitioners who develop a protocol that works….for many people. But when it comes to the Tough Cases, the ones that don’t fit normally into the way that bodies “usually” respond to their treatments…these practitioners just sort of ignore their questions and comments. I know that nobody can figure out how to fix everybody, but I am so interested to find more answers.

      Anyway, all that is to say: kudos for trying to help more people heal!

      Regards,
      Sarabeth



    • Chupo on March 13, 2014 at 18:33

      That would be useful after a famine but II wonder if the appendix would still serve that purpose in non-secretors since we can’t feed them fucose.



    • MC on March 14, 2014 at 01:17

      “Low carbers always fall back to that argument, but the fact of the matter is that no indigenous culture was ever found to be ketogenic unless they were in a fasted unfed state.”

      I’m not falling back to anything other then common sense. To say 150 carbs, everyday, indefinitely, or else, stomach cancer, is just not true. If you have 60 for a couple days, then 150, then 80 for a couple days, then 30, and the next day 150+, that is so far away from 30 everyday, indefinitely, I’m not sure why you’re even making the comparison.

      150, everyday, of ANY macronutrient, or else cancer, is complete nonsense. I don’t even have any protein on some days, or as little of it as possible. Our bodies can handle inconsistency in our macronutrients from a day to day basis. It’s a different story when your body lacks a macronutrient everyday, for years, or months.

      “Dave’s ongoing sensitivities implies that he is unable to heal his gut with his diet. That should be a warning flag. You don’t seem to want to acknowledge that. Feels like your head is in the sand about that one.”

      Um, no. Dave had his sensitivities long before he went low carb. Going zero carb for too long a period of time just added an additional problem. But he has had problems with rashes, mycotoxins, mold, etc, when he weighed 297 and was not restricting carbs in the slightest, but rather restricting fat.



    • LeonRover on March 14, 2014 at 03:54

      Wow: Leon is Cheerful (part 3)

      Still have intact appendix.

      Have taken anti-biotics circa 7 times only for throat sepsis.

      Only fart copiously with 3 kg spuds or 750gm phaseolus

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIMNXogXnvE

      My maternal ‘biome she still the very heart of me.

      Sláinte



    • Chris Woods on March 14, 2014 at 07:18

      Grace

      I have read enough that I should have expected most of your answer 🙂

      I will certainly give all of those a try. Up until now, it has mostly been more fermentable fiber foods, PS, fermented foods (I have long done so, but really upped it lately); and VSL3, L Reuteri (Microbiome Plus), L Plantarum (Jarrow) & Prescript Assist. I’ll add the AOR Pro-3 and look at the Swanson’s as well.

      Mg is inconsistent. I try for both topically and orally. I probably need to pay attention to Zinc. More water is probably a good idea too.

      Will let you know how it goes.



    • TMS71 on March 14, 2014 at 12:34

      Not only does it seem possible but it seems very likely.



    • gabriella kadar on March 14, 2014 at 12:57

      Headaches can be due to muscle pinching on cervical nerves. Head posture. Keep the ears above the shoulders. Every 1 inch ahead of the shoulders = the neck muscles carrying 10 pounds. Some people tip their heads inches ahead so they get headaches due to muscle strain.

      The head held in the ‘neutral position’ i.e. ears lined up with shoulders = no work for the neck muscles. Everything is in balance.



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 14, 2014 at 16:08

      Aaahh… Dr Woods, then you know that further I’d say you need an evaluation of your ‘zoo creatures’ because something appears to still be amiss… prebiotics+probiotics can only do so much when either/or the cages are filled with demons or no-dung (dung = ultimate probiotic).

      Have you considered GDX testing? Or empirically weeding? The bane of modern health is indeed the presence of opportunistic parasites and pathogenic overgrowths in the gut secondary to many factors (overutilization of antibiotics, lack of healthy soil exposures, stress/cortisol, lack of exercise, blah blah).

      Have you had a boatload of antibiotics?

      I just did a post you might find helpful?
      http://drbganimalpharm.blogspot.jp/2014/03/gi-biohacking-basics-mild-havoc-or.html



    • Grace/Dr.BG on March 14, 2014 at 18:02

      Sarabeth,

      You are certainly an angel for all the perseverance, detective work, execution and faith!

      Thank you for thoughtful comments and kind compliments. I am so grateful for RS, fermented foods, FTA, Richard and Tim because these elements all seemed to fill in where all the ‘GAPS’ were that I couldn’t figure out. Truly it is brilliant to figure how important prebiotics (Tim), kraut/probiotics (me), evolution, and getting the work integrated and out (Richard).

      I totally understand your frustration because I’m there too. Tough cases I think will always have some vulnerability after the initial assaults but at least now there are certainly more tools, solutions and diagnostic methods at our disposal. At the same, I’m certain you are aware, we’ve never been inundated with more gut erosive factors.

      For me I find it appalling that children are developing autism at the rate of 1:50 now when before it was 1:10,000. Each year it worsens. The environmental factors may take a global convergence of hearts, wills and minds to solve and we can’t ignore it.

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/03/20/autism-prevalence-is-now-at-1-in-50-children/
      http://www.ploscompbiol.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pcbi.1003518



    • DuckDodgers on March 14, 2014 at 19:26

      K,

      My apologies for not clarifying for you. I’ll do the best I can. Going by “net carbs” is an easy way to make sure you are getting enough carbs.

      http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/difference-between-grams-carbohydrates-net-carbohydrates-2378.html

      So, the carbs in a cup of broccoli don’t count because you basically burn more energy digesting the broccoli than you get from the carbs in them. I’m sure you know that, but just recapping unless you don’t.

      Glycosylating mucins are generally doable with any carbs. But starches are preferred because they are a good source of low toxin net carbs (and therefore easy on the gut) and they are good source of glucose. Different sugars are assimilated differently in the body, so there’s that.



    • DuckDodgers on March 14, 2014 at 19:43

      To say 150 carbs, everyday, indefinitely, or else, stomach cancer, is just not true..

      MC, gastrointestinal cancer appears to work on a bell curve. If you want to starve yourself of a macronutrient five or six days a week and live on the slope of that bell curve, be my guest. I’m not aware of any indigenous cultures that chose to stay in ketosis for their majority of their lives, so you’re in unchartered waters.



    • tatertot on March 14, 2014 at 19:55

      What you can ‘get away with’ is definitely the big unknown. Certainly genetics and exposure to toxic environments play a big part in the development of colon cancer and gut-related disease.

      Many SAD eaters, eating 500+ carbs a day end up with a toxic gut. Many live a long disease-free life. I think it’s great that people turn SAD upside down, do the low carb thing and reverse a whole slew of medical issues–I did it, I know many others who have done it that way. But as a long-term eating plan, I want to eat food that keeps my gut healthy–that’s where the real money is.

      All of the LC eating paths neglect prebiotics and gut health.



    • MC on March 15, 2014 at 09:04

      @DuckDodgers

      “If you want to starve yourself of a macronutrient five or six days a week and live on the slope of that bell curve, be my guest.”

      It’s not “starving” myself of a macronutrient. But if you want to equate “not gorging” with “starving” go right ahead.

      “I’m not aware of any indigenous cultures that chose to stay in ketosis for their majority of their lives, so you’re in unchartered waters.”

      I’m pretty sure ketosis couldn’t and wouldn’t have developed without a regular need, and use. And “majority of their lives” is misleading, because you can be in ketosis for most of the day, as well as while you sleep, but come out of it everyday in the evening. Meaning you don’t go more then a full day in ketosis, but spend the majority of your life, in ketosis.



    • DuckDodgers on March 15, 2014 at 11:29

      MC, ketosis give preferential treatment to the heart and brain — the two organs that are primarily necessary to sustain survival when food is scarce. The body does this to prevent itself from spreading itself too thin. All other organs go into standby mode to give the primary survival organs preferential treatment. If you spend the majority of your life putting your other organs into standby mode, you don’t win the lottery. In fact, many people come down with health issues like the ones Spanish Caravan discussed in this post:

      Long Term Very Low Carb and Ketogenic Diets = Bad News

      Sounds a lot like starvation when you look at the big picture.

      Oh, and forgot to mention that ketogenic diets are very good at promoting yeast and fungal infections. This shouldn’t come as a surprise since fungi and yeasts are eukaryotes with mitochondria that readily adapt to absorb ketones as their primary fuel source.



    • MC on March 15, 2014 at 22:56

      @DuckDodgers

      “All other organs go into standby mode to give the primary survival organs preferential treatment. If you spend the majority of your life putting your other organs into standby mode, you don’t win the lottery.”

      When I eat in the evening, I’m probably going out of ketosis with the amount of starch I eat. If you’re suggesting that going most of a day without significant starch, causes your body to fall apart, and your organs to shut down, or “standby.” then I don’t know what to say. It’s not even a full day. Even in my SAD days, I didn’t eat most of the day, and would gorge on food in the evening.

      “In fact, many people come down with health issues like the ones Spanish Caravan discussed in this post:”

      Show a study or post that actually has fuck all to do with the kind of diet I described numerous times now, and I’ll take it as applicable to what I’m doing. Another continuous VLC diet gets the same response I’ve given you before.

      “Oh, and forgot to mention that ketogenic diets are very good at promoting yeast and fungal infections. This shouldn’t come as a surprise since fungi and yeasts are eukaryotes with mitochondria that readily adapt to absorb ketones as their primary fuel source.”

      This is no different than me suggesting that you should avoid carbs cause they promote the growth of cancerous tumors, cause cancer prefers glucose as it’s primary fuel source. So what? If you have those problems, then avoiding glucose until the problem’s resolved might be beneficial. It doesn’t mean glucose caused the problem. Same thinking applies to ketones.



    • BrazilBrad on March 16, 2014 at 05:57

      There is a flaw in logic here I think. “energy” is calories used which can come from various sources including adipose tissue and ingested fat and protein. Eg., if you eat that broccoli drenched in butter there will be plenty of energy overall. It does not mean necessarily that all the glucose in it will be preferentially burned in the digestive process.



    • BrazilBrad on March 16, 2014 at 06:28

      @Duck, …”ketosis give preferential treatment to the heart and brain — the two organs that are primarily necessary to sustain survival when food is scarce. The body does this to prevent itself from spreading itself too thin. All other organs go into standby mode to give the primary survival organs preferential treatment. If you spend the majority of your life putting your other organs into standby mode, you don’t win the lottery.”…

      This seems heavy on opinion and stated as fact without a very good explanation. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you (yet?) because there is very little info here. Standby mode?

      I would argue that the body’s energy and muscular systems are also necessary for survival *especially* when food is scarce. It would do your heart and brain no good to be functional if you didn’t have the energy or strength to procure food in your time of need. In fact in a low-food (or low-carb) situation your insulin and other hormone levels are in prime adipose/fat burning mode and thus provide you more energy and for a far longer period of time. Kinda hard to believe that this is a detrimental state of being given that ancestral man certainly had frequent and intermittent periods of fasting. If it was an unhealthy or unnecessary state, it would have been selected out of our species, no? I think what @MC is describing (if he’s talking about carb cycling and/or IF) is a model that more closely matches our ancestors. Is that less than ideal?



    • BrazilBrad on March 16, 2014 at 07:41

      @Tatertot, can you please provide a link to, or more info on, these paleo coprolite studies? It’s interesting. What were they eating?



    • DuckDodgers on March 16, 2014 at 08:23

      Show a study or post that actually has fuck all to do with the kind of diet I described numerous times now, and I’ll take it as applicable to what I’m doing. Another continuous VLC diet gets the same response I’ve given you before.

      You don’t eat a ketogenic diet? That’s what SC was talking about. The whole point of SC’s post was that ketosis is a form of starvation.



    • DuckDodgers on March 16, 2014 at 08:35

      I would argue that the body’s energy and muscular systems are also necessary for survival *especially* when food is scarce. It would do your heart and brain no good to be functional if you didn’t have the energy or strength to procure food in your time of need. In fact in a low-food (or low-carb) situation your insulin and other hormone levels are in prime adipose/fat burning mode and thus provide you more energy and for a far longer period of time. Kinda hard to believe that this is a detrimental state of being given that ancestral man certainly had frequent and intermittent periods of fasting. If it was an unhealthy or unnecessary state, it would have been selected out of our species, no?

      BrazilBrad, when people start to die of starvation, they develop a dry hacking cough as mucus dries up. Same thing happens to people who spend too long in ketosis. Asprey actually describes this when he experimented with staying in ketosis for 90 days and got himself sick. His brain was in great shape though. 🙂

      I’m not suggesting that intermittent fasting is bad. It obviously has benefits. The problems appear to come when people try to stay in ketosis for days at a time over many months or years. Asprey tries to stay in ketosis as long as possible, and refeeding just to stave off obvious mucus symptoms. He doesn’t really care about or know much about peripheral issues.



    • DuckDodgers on March 16, 2014 at 08:37

      Show a study or post that actually has fuck all to do with the kind of diet I described numerous times now, and I’ll take it as applicable to what I’m doing.

      MC, That’s just it. There are no studies. You’re in unchartered waters. Good luck with being a guinea pig.



    • gabriella kadar on March 16, 2014 at 12:11

      Duck, if someone keeps it up long enough, their blood albumin level goes down and edema happens. That’s what happens also when someone starves to death: they get bloated.



    • MC on March 16, 2014 at 22:50

      @DuckDodgers

      “You don’t eat a ketogenic diet? That’s what SC was talking about. The whole point of SC’s post was that ketosis is a form of starvation.”

      Cyclical ketogenic, though it’s still vague calling it even that, which is why I gave you the numbers. SC mentioned VLC, long term VLC specifically, which is not the same diet I’ve outlined already, several times.

      “MC, That’s just it. There are no studies.”

      So you’re basically just taking a VLC vendetta out on everything that involves ketosis without making the distinctions between different ketogenic dietary approaches. Details matter.

      “You’re in unchartered waters. Good luck with being a guinea pig.”

      I am being my own guinea pig. Checking how a diet effects me, what works for me, makes me feel, and perform good, getting tested. Isn’t that what you’ve been doing with RS? I didn’t just take somebody’s word for it, n=1.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 11:17

      Cyclical ketogenic

      Most VLC studies use 50g of carbs/day as their carb ceiling. You say that the Bulletproof diet is 30-80g day. That averages out to 50g/day and I see on the Bulletproof forums that many people are aiming for 50g day. That’s VLC 5 to 6 days a week.

      Nobody really knows if refeeding 1 or 2 days a week is enough to make up for the damage done on the 5 or 6 days a week at VLC. Anyway, it sounds like you understand the risks.

      Isn’t that what you’ve been doing with RS? I didn’t just take somebody’s word for it, n=1.

      God no. There’s been hundreds of studies done over the past 40 years on RS. It’s very well understood. Though, you wouldn’t know that by listening to Asprey since he’s incapable of having a discussion about the underlying research.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 12:08

      @Duck, ” the damage done on the 5 or 6 days a week at VLC”… what is this damage that is done? Lower mucin output, supposedly, during some of these days?



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 12:27

      I’m skeptical that there would be significantly lower mucin output given the livers ability to store, release, and generate glucose even in the complete absence of dietary carbohydrate. And in this case we are talking about carb re-feeds not complete absence.



    • tatertot on March 17, 2014 at 12:39

      I’ve been enjoying this back and forth because it makes me question my beliefs.

      I think the human body is a remarkable piece of equipment, and if you are feeding it right most of the time it will reward you, especially when concerning gut bugs.

      I doubt the gut needs a steady supply of fermentable fiber flowing through it 24/7/365. IF diets and LC with refeeds are probably all ancestral eating patterns that should be compatible with good gut health, especially if the refeeds are full of prebiotics.

      When I was a kid, my grandparents would make spring salads out of the first thing to green up, dandelions…the weeds in your lawn. Turns out they are one of the richest sources of inulin in the plant world.

      I can imagine our ancestors going for months without good prebiotics, and that was probably OK for them. Nowadays, our guts are not all that healthy to begin with–antibiotics, disconnect from eating dirty things, excessive handwashing, modern stresses, etc… combine to give us much less powerful gut microbiomes than we had ‘back in the day’.

      I’m pretty sure that long-term LC diets that don’t provide prebiotics are terrible. Intermittant LC diets that provide ample prebiotics are probably OK, and maybe even really good for our guts.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 12:39

      Sorry, re-reading it again the part “Nobody really knows” I interpret as also saying that nobody really knows if there is in fact any damage taking place during 4-5 days of VLC followed by 1-2 days of high carb.

      Yet, there are plenty of studies that show that benefits of IF and plenty of n=1’s on the effectiveness of CKD/carb-cycling on lean body comp. And while body-comp/mirror-test is not a perfect indicator of health and longevity it’s a damn strong one. I guess we will never know if/until all these carb-cyclers come down with GI cancers. I’m betting, literally with my life, that that is not the case. And anyway overall cancer risk (any type, not just GI) and mortality risk is the most important to me.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 12:54

      what is this damage that is done? Lower mucin output, supposedly, during some of these days?

      It’s well known that VLC causes mucin/mucus issues. As I’ve said a number of times in this thread already, Asprey and many others have experienced these dry eyes and dry sinuses from VLC. But, the other damage seems to be to immune issues. Did you not read Spanish Caravan’s post? It’s all related.

      I’m skeptical that there would be significantly lower mucin output given the livers ability to store, release, and generate glucose even in the complete absence of dietary carbohydrate.

      If that were true, then Asprey and many others would not have had the VLC mucus deficiencies that they have observed. Mucus issues are quite common with VLC.

      And in this case we are talking about carb re-feeds not complete absence.

      VLC isn’t complete absence either. VLC is ~50g of carbs. And yet, VLC causes mucus deficiencies and immune issues. But, yes, these refeeds certainly help a lot. We just don’t know how much. My guess is that it either just delays compounded issues or perhaps it eliminates them altogether. Nobody really knows.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 13:04

      I can imagine our ancestors going for months without good prebiotics, and that was probably OK for them.

      Maybe I’m not being creative enough, but I struggle to think of an indigenous culture that didn’t eat a decent quantities of carbs/fiber/raw glycan-rich meats year round. Certainly there were times when food was scarce, but I tend to think that the absence of good fiber in the diet is really due to a modern refinement of grains. Modern people get away with it thanks to supplements, but people tended to get pretty sick if they didn’t figure out nutrition before supplements were invented.



    • tatertot on March 17, 2014 at 13:12

      I was thinking of ancestors more recent, like in the past hundreds of years. Yes, paleo ancestors and prior would have been eating prebiotics (and probiotics) year round for sure.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 13:16

      Tatertot, agreed. Whatever your diet makeup, better to have a good amount of pre/pro biotics in there. Gotta feed the bugs.
      The thing I’ve been wondering lately is what are the effects of never, or almost never exercising the metabolic pathway that is on the far left of the curve?… that ramps up your ketones and hormones that promote a fat-burning state. If you are always eating sufficient calories and carb’s on a daily basis and never calorie-fasting, carb-fasting, or calorie-restricting then you never exercise this metabolic pathway to any large degree and hence I think become less metabolically flexible. Or, another way to say it, is you are less “fat adapted” or able to tap-into/liberate your body fat and then have trouble losing body fat if/when desired as well as having more frequent and/or severe hunger pangs. Perhaps this is due to an inability to create all the hormones in the necessary amounts. In the extreme case, a lack of met-flex and ability to create the proper hormones becomes metabolic syndrome. I think it could be beneficial to exercise this alternate energy pathway and hormone creation to stay flexible and healthy just like other body functions. Use it or lose it. Nature put it there for a reason, right? The question is what is the optimal frequency/amount to exercise/cycle this?



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 13:22

      BrazilBrad, I agree with exercising metabolic pathways. I try to do my eating during daylight hours (a casual sort of intermittent fasting). That seems pretty natural to me. I just don’t believe our ancestors would have evolved to stay in ketosis for very long periods of time.



    • tatertot on March 17, 2014 at 13:23

      Agreed! I find what works for me is IF’ing daily by not eating until noon, exercising in the fasted state. Then just 2 meals a day, sometimes lunch is pure meat, sometimes vegan, sometimes omnivore. Dinner is generally an omnivorous feast with a big blast of prebiotics and fermented food.

      And, I usually eat a bit differently on the weekends, just to mix things up.

      I like to think we have all these capabilities for a reason and like you, like to exercise them all on occasion.

      Long-term low carb w/o refeeds neglects lots of these flexible pathways.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 13:30

      Does PHD/Jaminet recommend IF, CKD, or other forms of diet cycling?



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 13:34

      Does PHD/Jaminet recommend IF, CKD, or other forms of diet cycling?

      Yes, IF is a major part of PHD.

      Also, even with 30% carbs, that still offloads about 200 calories to gluconeogenesis (GNG), if I remember correctly. And, I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure that nobody actually knows how much GNG can really handle. I think it’s all sort of theoretical as to what the output of GNG really is.



    • Ellen on March 18, 2014 at 04:17

      But, aside from killing off gut bugs by lack of fiber, what about the ketones themselves being food for fungus and thus promoting /exacerbating fungal overgrowth? So that if one has a fungal imbalance to begin with, a ketogenic diet, even with enough RS, might do harm?

      Is it possible that enough RS would control some fungus, but not others?



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 14:25

      @Duck, as far as I see it Jaminet was talking about zero carb eating not even VLC and certainly not CKD. And anyway, he’s obviously a biased source given he recommends a high carb diet or at least what I would consider a high carb diet. For an equally strong, if not equally biased, opposing view there is Dr. Peter Attia who does not agree with the VLC low-mucus/GI-cancer linkage. He found it “not compelling” and said in comments on his blog that he does not agree with Jaminet’s view on this. Of course he’s a hard core steady-state VLC eater but also supp’s RS via superstarch, or did at one time anyway.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 14:32

      Negg July 14, 2013
      Can you address the dangers of low carb eating as described by Jaminet Specifically:
      http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2010/11/dangers-of-zero-carb-diets-ii-mucus-deficiency-and-gastrointestinal-cancers/

      (reply)

      Peter Attia July 14, 2013
      Read the article, Negg. It’s pretty clear what he’s saying. He’s not talking about “low” carb, he’s specifically addressing “zero” carb. A zero carb diet is nearly impossible to consume. I don’t know anyone who has (except him). I guess the Inuit did, though they seemed fine. Could be genetic differences, I suppose.

      comment taken from here >> http://eatingacademy.com/sports-and-nutrition/introduction-to-superstarch-part-ii



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 14:41

      Also this page is particularly enlightening… on the Carb-Mucus relationship
      Ketomyths: http://www.lucastafur.com/2011/03/ketomyths_08.html

      Gotta love his title/slogan… “We are 90% microbes and 10% human.” no arguments on that one.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 14:50

      I’m posting this part of that Lucas Tafur link because I think it’s awesome. I was trying to find out how the mucin production works and here he says it all in one place, with links to references even…

      “But what exactly determines GI mucin production? Mucin biosynthesis is highly sensitive to protein malnutrition, specially threonine deficiency (1,2,3). Other aminoacids like serine, proline and cysteine can also promote mucin synthesis (4). When intestinal epithelial goblet cells are deprived of glucose, butyrate modulates MUC gene expression and becomes the main regulator of mucin synthesis (5). There is no evidence that the abscence of dietary glucose affects mucin synthesis. So any deficiency of mucin in ODs would occur because of a low protein intake, not because of a glucose deficiency (call it a secondary-glucose deficiency if you wish).

      Thr, Ser, Pro and Cys are all glucogenic aminoacids. The demand for these amino acids increases when eating a very low carbohydrate diet because gluconeogenesis is increased to maintain a normal blood glucose level. Eating a diet low in these amino acids could compromise mucin production because they are redirected to glucose production instead of other biosynthetic pathways. “



    • Richard Nikoley on March 17, 2014 at 15:34

      “Thr, Ser, Pro and Cys are all glucogenic aminoacids. The demand for these amino acids increases when eating a very low carbohydrate diet because gluconeogenesis is increased to maintain a normal blood glucose level.”

      Well c’mon, Brad. Either you’re being a bit disingenuous, or you and DD are talking past one-another. Essentially, you’ve laid out the underlying mechanism for why LCers…and particularly the new thing where you lower protein intake because it’s like chocolate cake…might be prone to this. After all, you’ve got 3 macros. Cut out one, you’re left with two. Implicate one as just like another, you’re left with one.

      …Waiting for the 100% healthyallfatdiet.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 15:59

      Brad. that made me laugh. First of all, nobody here cuts out protein. Second of all, mucin-2 (MUC-2), the main protein of digestive tract mucus, is 80 percent sugar and 20 percent amino acids by weight. Third of all, many people who go VLC describe a decrease in mucus. For instance, here’s what Dave Asprey described:

      Dave Asprey wrote:

      I do not believe it’s optimal to be on a zero-carbohydrate diet for long periods of time. I went for a little more than three months of eating a single serving of vegetables each day. The rest was fat, Bulletproof Coffee, and grass-fed meat. The results were disastrous. My sleep quality went away, I had dry eyes and dry sinuses because I lacked the starch necessary to make mucus, and it also gave me a leaky gut which resulted in several new food allergies.

      That’s just what happens. You can eat all the protein you want, but if you don’t eat carbs you’ll have a difficult time making mucin glycans.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 16:08

      Richard, Not sure I follow you. LC’ers might be prone to this because they might be eating both low carb and low protein at the same time? Is that a common thing? I suppose there are those fat-gobblers that are eating bars of butter and guzzling the lard, but is that common? I would think not but maybe I’m wrong.
      Btw, I’m not saying I agree with Tafur. I’m still trying to understand this subject.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 16:34

      @Duck, “making you laugh”, if that’s not a weak argument ploy I don’t know what is. You keep repeating yourself about Dave Asprey and gang as if repeating it will change anything. He or that group does not define truth. They are but a small bit of evidence and I’ve not seen the details of their diet. The molecular composition of mucus is irrelevant. What is relevant is the mechanism and conditions under which it is made. Adipose tissue is made almost entirely of fat, does that mean it must be created from dietary fat? I know you know this, so I am left to assume you are just playing logic games to argue your point – in a weak way I might add. But I kinda already got that impression from you exchange with @MC above. I’m not interested in being right, I want to know the truth about what exactly is the causal relationship, if one exists, between glucose intake and mucin production. And from what I have seen so far there is far from a consensus on the topic.
      If you want to be convincing then discuss the opinions of Attia and this Tafur fellow in a logical fashion. If you want to be unconvincing just keep repeating the same thing over and over.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 16:44

      BrazilBrad,

      Part of the problem is that mucin is just one type of glycan in the insanely massive human glycome.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycome

      Every day, your body needs to glycosylate about 2,000,000 different kinds of glycans. Glycans are carbohydrates that are attached (or “glycosylated”) to proteins and fats. Scientists also refer to these glycosylated compounds as “glycans”.

      So, to give you an idea of how complex that is, the human genome has about 25,000 genes. We barely know anything about the genome. We know practically nothing about the 2,000,000 glycans that we need to produce each day. Nothing. It’s a whole other universe that will never be fully understood.

      As far as I know, there about 20 different types of mucins. So when you think about the fact that we are just talking about 20 of the 2,000,000 glycans that the human body needs to create with available carbohydrates, you begin to see how an individual actually noticing a lack of mucus while doing VLC could mean that anywhere up to 2,000,000 different glycoslyated compounds in the human body are diminished by VLC.

      Yes, refeeding probably undoes most of the damage of VLC. But the truth is that we’ll never really know how much.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 17:00

      @Duck, you said glycans created with carbohydrates but I think you meant to say glucose, OK.
      I’m still reading that you’re saying the same thing… That VLC causes damage and yet that has not been proven or convincingly shown by you. You said yourself that we don’t know if the liver can produce sufficient glucose for the body through gluconeogenesis. If it can given an otherwise adequate diet then there is no mucin shortage and no damage. If it cannot, then there should be a shortage of lots of those other 2 million glycans which presumably are important for something and so shouldn’t there be other evidence – like other obvious health problems?



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 17:06

      @Duck, is there a study that shows a reasonable size of VLC subjects were shown to have low mucin production by some mechanism a little more scientific than them “noticing”?



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 17:07

      Adipose tissue is made almost entirely of fat

      Sure, if you want to oversimplify a complex compound, you can call it “fat”. But look a little closer and you’ll see that “fat” is actually composed of a lot of triglycerides — which includes glycerol, a sugar alcohol. Triglycerides are a kind of “glycerolipid”.

      This is what I’m talking about. Carbohydrates are everywhere and ketogenic diets don’t make an effort to account for their creation and maintenance if for no other reason than the fact that the catalog of glycans in the human glycome are so massive and so poorly understood.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 17:17

      Btw, I think that study (5) that Tafur references is interesting because it shows that fermentable carbohydrate intake which creates the most butyrate is the main regulator of mucin production not glucose. And so it’s not just carb intake that is important but the KIND of carbs. RS anyone?



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 17:22

      sorry, should have posted the link to the study.

      Butyrate specifically modulates MUC gene expression in intestinal epithelial goblet cells deprived of glucose.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15308471



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 17:25

      @Duck, you said glycans created with carbohydrates but I think you meant to say glucose, OK.

      Yes. Though, again, you are oversimplifying. Finished glycans contain a wide variety of sugars and sugar alcohols.

      That VLC causes damage and yet that has not been proven or convincingly shown by you. You said yourself that we don’t know if the liver can produce sufficient glucose for the body through gluconeogenesis. If it can given an otherwise adequate diet then there is no mucin shortage and no damage. If it cannot, then there should be a shortage of lots of those other 2 million glycans which presumably are important for something and so shouldn’t there be other evidence – like other obvious health problems?

      I really don’t know what to tell you, BrazilBrad. There are plenty of people here, who frequent this blog — including Richard himself — who developed health issues from VLC. Many of us have our battle scars and are merely trying to warn others that it wasn’t all fun and games. Did you not read Spanish Caravan’s post covering all this? I feel like we are going in circles.

      I have no hard evidence to show you because the studies haven’t been done. It really should be up to VLC promoters to prove that a VLC diet is safe. It’s certainly not my job.



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 17:39

      @Richard, now I think I see what you mean. Based on this, if a LC’er is not eating much glucose by way of sugars and simple carbs then in addition to sufficient protein intake it’s even more important that they are eating sufficient fermentable foods that increase butyrate production.



    • marie on March 17, 2014 at 18:24

      DuckDodgers, MC and BrazilBrad, have you tried ketogenic nutrition yourselves for an extended time, ever been in verified ketosis for more than a day or a week at a time? I can’t tell from your arguments.

      The reason I ask is because the only people I know who have been doing it long term successfully have taken the time to learn about the mechanisms involved and they all dial-in important nutritional elements that the casual dieter doesn’t think of, such as liver, cartilage, bone broth, fatty fish, K2-butter, coconut oil (not only to promote ketosis and feed the brain but to keep from needing extra bile), free-range eggs and a large variety of vegetables and seaweed.
      A large variety.
      Of vegetables and seaweed.

      Such a ketogenic diet provides complete nutrition as well as soluble/fermentable fiber and it doesn’t seem to have any effect on mucin production, for years. I’ve observed this close-up. With 20/20 hindsight, you could even ask “why should it?” since after all, the gut bacteria produce glucose too, apart from the liver.

      It all comes back down to the gut microbiome, yes? Any diet, no matter it’s macro-composition, that doesn’t seed and feed the microbiome is going to eventually lead to problems.

      The only thing these people are missing is resistant starch. If some of the main beneficial bacterial in the gut, such as certain ruminococii, only thrive on RS, then that may well be an issue for them long term.

      Simulating ingestion of raw starchy plants (since reenactment isn’t and never was the point) by eating just the extracted RS, such as potato starch, is a good insurance policy for them.
      Nothing else needs to change, if there are other vegetables and soluble fiber already in the ketogenic diet.

      Above all though, there’s no diet on earth that can or should be maintained 24/7. Not only was food availability known to have been variable during our evolution, but later every old culture developed a fasting tradition. Whether it’s because fasting gives organs a break or switches-out the processes they run (eg the liver) or lowers IGF-1, or turns on apoptosis so that cells and tissues don’t accumulate trash, I don’t see how any diet can be ‘good’ long-term if it doesn’t include IF. If there’s one practice that promotes metabolic flexibility, it’s periodic fasting.



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 18:57

      Marie, when I did VLC and ate all the recommended liver, cartilage, bone broth, fatty fish, K2-butter, coconut oil, eggs, etc. Nearly killed myself when a fungal infection ran rampant. Wasn’t fun. This was before RS was a thing, so not much else I can say.



    • marie on March 17, 2014 at 19:06

      DuckDodgers, it sure sounds like you unknowingly were killing-off gut bugs. I never had bad results myself, but then, I was coming at it already from a perspective of life-long periodic fasting and a traditional diet heavy on inulin and general veggies – pure luck. So then that gut biome was not too bad off and metabolic flexibility was already good.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 17, 2014 at 19:20

      You haven’t heard of “Nutritional Ketosis,” what we’re going to have clarity on, now that we have clarity on super high cholesterol?

      You seriously haven’t heard that to get really “nutritional” you need to cut the chocolate cake protein and up all those “nutritionally” dense fats, packed with micronutrients?



    • DuckDodgers on March 17, 2014 at 19:26

      Marie, yes, I definitely killed of my gut bugs. Had no idea at the time.



    • DuckDodgers on March 18, 2014 at 09:33

      Well for one, I don’t agree that 50 grams of starch is VLC, since VLC would essentially be no starch whatsoever.

      Well, now you’re just redefining VLC. The medical literature tends to define it as 50g/day or under.

      From: Cardiovascular and Hormonal Aspects of Very-Low-Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diets

      Very-low-carbohydrate diets (i.e., <50 g/d) result in a metabolic state of ketosis, and these diets are commonly referred to as “ketogenic” diets

      From: Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

      The role of very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets (VLCKD) in the long-term management of obesity is not well established. The present meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether individuals assigned to a VLCKD (i.e. a diet with no more than 50 g carbohydrates/d) achieve better long-term body weight and cardiovascular risk factor management when compared with individuals assigned to a conventional low-fat diet.



    • marie on March 17, 2014 at 19:33

      Good grief, don’t remind me. Why is it the reformed (religious, political, nutritional or otherwise) that make the most zealous zealots?



    • BrazilBrad on March 17, 2014 at 19:59

      @Marie, no never VLC on a steady state basis. I, and I think MC said as well, prefer carb-cycling. At most I think I was lowish-C for 4-5 days with a refeed on the weekend but much more common I was doing daily IF and consuming carbs at night, sometimes quite a lot of carbs – like fruit binges post gym workout. Now I will pay more attention to getting more fermentable carbs. The only negatives I ever had from the LC I’ve done is feet and calf cramps. I kinda use that as a gauge now that I need to up my carb intake.



    • marie on March 17, 2014 at 20:16

      DuckDodgers, that’s why I don’t think it’s the low glucose itself that accounts for any of the reported VLC problems. People who happened to eat more veggies (especially if high in inulin or fermentable fibers) seem to do just fine. If they Fast too, then peak performance even. Now with the RS info, they can protect themselves long-term as well.

      Whoever advocated a ketogenic diet and Didn’t stress the importance of vegetables should have corrected that a long time ago (many did). Today if they don’t, with all the widely publicized info on the microbiome, they should just be shot.



    • marie on March 17, 2014 at 20:32

      BrazilBrad, o.k., that explains why you never hit any of the problems others sometimes report, you were never really in a predominantly ketone-based metabolic state (we always make ketones, it’s the relative proportions that define ‘ketosis’) and certainly not for any significant length of time. Also, no matter any smaller nutrition deficiencies, the IFing protects you from a lot of adverse effects.
      Still, can’t make-up for magnesium-potassium balance (and veggies are our best sources – one of the ‘old’ reasons keto needed veggie emphasis) – cramps aren’t fun.
      Annnnd….now I just feel old. We’ve had the IF discussion before you and I, eh? 🙂



    • MC on March 17, 2014 at 22:57

      @DuckDodgers

      “Most VLC studies use 50g of carbs/day as their carb ceiling. You say that the Bulletproof diet is 30-80g day. That averages out to 50g/day and I see on the Bulletproof forums that many people are aiming for 50g day. That’s VLC 5 to 6 days a week.”

      Well for one, I don’t agree that 50 grams of starch is VLC, since VLC would essentially be no starch whatsoever. One large baked sweet potato has about 31 net carbs. Vegetables like spinach only have about 2 net carbs for a cup of them, so I generally don’t even bother counting such vegetables as a carb.

      But one and a half, large baked sweet potatoes, and all the vegetables you want, would be close to the 50 grams mark. I would not lump that in with the only salads, no refeeds, permanent VLC crowd.

      “Though, you wouldn’t know that by listening to Asprey since he’s incapable of having a discussion about the underlying research.”

      Yeah, which is why he linked to Richard’s post that cited 35 studies. Why he also linked to Sisson’s and Kresser’s posts and thoughts. Also why he mentioned the benefits of butyrate, insulin sensitivity, from resistant starch, and said the studies were compelling.

      Oh, but he mentioned potential problems too, therefore you can’t love him anymore lol

      He’s being just as thorough with RS as he is with coffee, butter, meat, probiotics, chocolate, safe starches, and anything else in his diet. He does this for everything pertaining to diet. Don’t think he’s going to make an exception for RS.

      @Tatertot

      “I doubt the gut needs a steady supply of fermentable fiber flowing through it 24/7/365. IF diets and LC with refeeds are probably all ancestral eating patterns that should be compatible with good gut health, especially if the refeeds are full of prebiotics. ”

      That’s basically the conclusion I’ve come to. It’s very different from a permanent VLC diet without refeeds.



    • Ellen on March 18, 2014 at 16:38

      Paul Jaminet has said that there is…that ketones feed fungus/yeast. Here is something from Mark Sisson

      Paul Jaminet, who suffered from candida overgrowth, argues that since candida (being eukaryotes) have mitochondria that can feed on both ketones and carbs (as opposed to prokaryote bacteria without mitochondria), going very low carb or ketogenic will only provide more fuel for the overgrowth. Furthermore, since ketones are water-soluble and pass easily through cellular membranes, ketones will actually be a more accessible food source for candida. Don’t go high-carb, since any extra glucose will just be food for the yeast, but don’t go ketogenic, either. Stick to around 100-150 grams of carbs while still limiting sugar. Although other sources do recommend going as low-carb as possible, my money’s on Paul.

      Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/candida/#ixzz2wMOEH3

      And here is Paul :

      Hi Claire,
      Diabetics are prone to high ketone levels and ketones do tend to promote Candida growth, so yours is a common problem.
      The issue of carbs is a little easier to address for type II diabetics, as they generally have some remaining pancreatic beta cell function and handle carbs better than type Is. For them I would typically recommend ~400 carb calories as this will usually work better for them than lower carb diets by helping to suppress appetite, improve immunity, and improve insulin sensitivity.
      Type I diabetics would normally benefit from lower carb consumption, more along the lines of Bernstein’s recommendations, and higher protein. However, immunity to Candida will tend to be optimized around 400-600 daily calories from carbs.
      I don’t know what’s optimal in your case. I think you have to experiment. It will probably be somewhere inbetween 30g and 100g carbs per day, but I don’t know where.
      There are other variables to tend to. Eating more protein may help you. Generally speaking, eating more vegetables and low-carb plant foods tends to help; green leafy vegetables, onions, garlic, tomatoes, berries, high-phenolic extra virgin olive oil, and many spices are good anti-Candida foods. Circadian rhythm tactics described in our book will help. Therapeutic supplements include NAC for glutathione.
      Try to get carbs from starches and vegetables rather than sugary foods. Try to eat carbs with acids and fats as described in this post: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2011/10/how-to-minimize-hyperglycemic-toxicity/
      Let me know how things progress!
      Best, Paul



    • Ellen on March 18, 2014 at 20:07

      Oh I know…KNOW …. From my own personal experience that you are right Richard. I first noticed that my FBG was over 100 at some point after I been low carbing for while, so i went Very low carb to try and fix it, but never could reduce the fasting number. It wasn’t till I went on PHD that I was able to reduce it by 10 points. Now with RS and even more starch it is lower



    • GTR on March 18, 2014 at 07:51

      @BrazilBrad “You said yourself that we don’t know if the liver can produce sufficient glucose for the body through gluconeogenesis.”

      OK – so you use VLC if your glucose metabolism doesn’t work (eg. Alzheimers). What about the situations in which your ketone metabolism, gluconeogenesis or other pillars of LC doesn’t work in a given person? Wouldn’t then VLC be devastating for such person? How did you check if your ketone metabolism, gluconeogenesis etc. had been working before going LC?



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 08:18

      @GTR, I don’t agree that one uses LC (ideally intermittently IMO) because their “glucose metabolism doesn’t work”. Most people use it for the various health benefits (met-flex, etc.) I don’t have the answers to your questions. I think you have to try it and if your system can’t handle it you will know soon enough – you will feel worse not better. If done as a short term test then less likely to do “devastating” damage if that’s even possible. Same for doing it intermittently via IF/CKD. But I’m no doctor. Do your own research and n=1. Keep in mind there can be a not-so-fun adaptation phase at the beginning. Maybe you already know all this?
      Try searching for articles on MarksDailyApple for “fat-adapted” and “fat adaptation” which is related.



    • DuckDodgers on March 18, 2014 at 09:39

      But, aside from killing off gut bugs by lack of fiber, what about the ketones themselves being food for fungus and thus promoting /exacerbating fungal overgrowth? So that if one has a fungal imbalance to begin with, a ketogenic diet, even with enough RS, might do harm?

      Precisely. That appears to be what can happen.

      Is it possible that enough RS would control some fungus, but not others?

      It’s possible that RS might shift the balance of acidity (from the SCFAs) so that the yeasts and fungus might become benign, rather than pathogenic in the gut. But fungus and yeasts can grow anywhere in the body, and those ketones should still be available as a high-potency fuel for the eukaryotes throughout the bloodstream. So, I don’t know.



    • DuckDodgers on March 18, 2014 at 09:56

      Yeah, which is why he linked to Richard’s post that cited 35 studies. Why he also linked to Sisson’s and Kresser’s posts and thoughts. Also why he mentioned the benefits of butyrate, insulin sensitivity, from resistant starch, and said the studies were compelling.

      You seriously think linking to something is the same thing as having an intelligent conversation about a topic? Come on. You don’t need to be such an apologist for him. He’s a big boy.

      We would welcome an honest discussion about potential problems with RS. We want to hear such a discussion take place. But Dave is incapable because it’s rather clear from what he says on his podcasts that he hasn’t even bothered to read the studies that he linked to. If he did, we’d actually be having a discussion about the role of prebiotics in human health, and not Dave’s symptoms.



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 10:35

      @Ellen, … “aside from killing off gut bugs by lack of fiber, what about the ketones themselves”… this is an incorrect assumption that a more ketogenic diet necessarily must be low in fermentable carbs like fiber/RS/etc. You can eat plenty of veggies/fermentables and still stay in/near keto land. It seems, its even more important to eat plenty of prebiotics if you are eating LC.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 18, 2014 at 10:42

      Ellen,

      because BrazilBrad might not want you to have complete information, RS _might_ be a benefit while in ketosis, but not much if anything on blood glucose regulation.

      https://freetheanimal.com/2013/10/resistant-ingestion-blunting.html

      But, if you eat hundreds of grams of starch daily, you might find that you exercise that metabolic pathway and have both better blood glucose regulation and better heath. And, you’ll actually be eating like a normal person and not a humanoid in fear.

      I’m sure that was just a minor oversight, Brad…and MC.



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 10:42

      Me thinks if you’ve got yeast and fungus issues in your blood, ketones are not what you should be focusing on. There is no causal link.



    • Charles on March 18, 2014 at 10:51

      One of the first things I tried was seeing if potato starch would knock me out of ketosis. It didn’t. So a ketosis + RS diet is a realistic approach. Given all that we’ve been discussing for the past few months, I’m thinking that would be a temporary measure. But then again, for most people who have damaged their carbohydrate metabolism, it might be necessary long term. After stressing out the carb systems for years or decades, I’m not sure how possible it is to re-train or restore to full functioning. On the other hand, there might be value in exercising those systems. If there’s been too much damage, however, that might not work.



    • DuckDodgers on March 18, 2014 at 11:16

      Me thinks if you’ve got yeast and fungus issues in your blood, ketones are not what you should be focusing on. There is no causal link.

      And you know this because…?

      Last time I checked, yeast and fungus were eukaryotic organisms. Eukaryotic organisms have mitochondria capable of rapidly absorbing ketones for fuel. Sounds like a casual link to me.



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 11:25

      @Richard, Yeah, might have been an oversight. I got off topic on LC with Ducky. Btw, what are we being fearful and abnormal about?



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 11:59

      @Ducky, last time I checked… I no longer care about logic tangents.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 18, 2014 at 13:50

      Charles:

      The problem is that in physiologic insulin resistance, you never know until you try.

      For me, I thought I was broken and yet, the more starch I add to my plate, the better my numbers. It’s like exercise.

      I’ll have a BG reading in my next post 1:15 after a HUGE plate of fried potatoes and 3 eggs.



    • Charles on March 18, 2014 at 15:42

      I totally agree with that. You have to experiment, and challenging the systems is good. But there can be limitations. Hey I can work out with as much effort as possible at age 62, but there’s no way I’m going to make gains like I did when I was in my 20s and had all sorts of testosterone and growth hormone coursing through my veins. Likewise, after decades of low-carbing, it may take a long time to get back to better carb metabolism. And it may be that some folks just can’t do it, their pancreas may just have a hair trigger or something else isn’t optimized. Everyone is different. Some just have more resilience.

      Now it’s also pretty clear that improving the gut biome, and adding the right kind of carbs will improve carb- and insulin-sensitivity. But that’s going to be on a continuum based on age and genetics and genomics. I’m guessing 80% of people who add RS and eat RS-optimized carbs are going to get significant improvement. The other 20% will get less-to-none. That’s still a damn good ratio. And until you try, you won’t know.



    • DuckDodgers on March 18, 2014 at 17:00

      @Ellen. Yep, 100-150g worked like a charm for me.



    • Ellen on March 19, 2014 at 07:48

      Brazil asked: @Ellen, how do ketones in the blood feed candida in the GI tract? I’m not hip to that mechanism.

      All I know is what Duck and I posted above….fungus/yeasts are eukaryotes….can’t really address
      The specifics of the ketones being in The blood and the candida being in the GI tract. I don’t know if it matters…. that kind of info is above my pay grade. Perhaps Duck can enlighten us if there is more to it than than what has already been said.



    • BrazilBrad on March 18, 2014 at 22:01

      @Ellen, how do ketones in the blood feed candida in the GI tract? I’m not hip to that mechanism.



    • MC on March 18, 2014 at 22:23

      @DuckDodgers

      “Well, now you’re just redefining VLC. The medical literature tends to define it as 50g/day or under.”

      My guess is the medical literature doesn’t mean net carbs, as 50 grams of gross carb intake from spinach, broccoli, and kale, will be different from 50 grams of gross carb intake from sweet potatoes. Usually VLC studies are not including eating potatoes, sweet potatoes, butternut squash, or white rice, on a daily basis. It’s just a guess. But as I said, I don’t even count something like spinach as a carb. Where as that’s probably all they’re counting. 50 grams of carbs is not necessarily the same thing as 50 grams of starch.

      Since they say 50 carbs and not 50 starch.

      “You seriously think linking to something is the same thing as having an intelligent conversation about a topic? Come on. You don’t need to be such an apologist for him. He’s a big boy. ”

      I just think you want to hate the guy, that’s all. He’s currently trying to “hack” RS, and has discussed his personal findings so far. That’s about it. You want him to tell you more of what you already know, write him a letter/e-mail him.

      He’s not going to discuss how amazing something is if he hasn’t gotten it to work for himself first. That’s what my guess is, but if you want to assume the worst, then that’s your choice.

      @Richard

      “But, if you eat hundreds of grams of starch daily, you might find that you exercise that metabolic pathway and have both better blood glucose regulation and better heath. And, you’ll actually be eating like a normal person and not a humanoid in fear.

      I’m sure that was just a minor oversight, Brad…and MC.”

      Maybe I’m not interpreting what was said in that post properly. Are you saying if I eat a high potato meal, but include lots of RS, that I will stay in ketosis?

      Or just that RS, by itself, will not take me out of ketosis? I understood that part at least, from the post.

      I mentioned I did not include RS as a carb, when I gave my numbers of 30-80 grams of carbs, or 100-150 for refeeds, that did not include resistant starch, and fiber, as those don’t behave the same as plain starch.



    • Charles on March 18, 2014 at 22:49

      I personally didn’t start eating a ketogenic diet out of fear. I started eating that way in 1972 because I was tired of being sick, stupid, tired and fat. Oh, and hungry all the time. (I should have gone back to the meat and milk diet I started on in 1967 or so, but oh well.) And over the years, doing it off and on, it kept me feeling pretty good, though all that time I was LC, and often VLC, but not usually doing ketosis. It was only after a few decades of LC that it no longer worked, that ketosis made me feel worse and didn’t burn any fat. But it took a long time.

      I understand the fear-based-approach RN is talking about. But that fear doesn’t come from nothing. It comes from unpleasant experiences and looking for a sense of control. After a while, like anything, a way of eating becomes comfortable, and after counting on something for so many years, and listening to Taubes and Stephan (for a long time) and Mike Eades and Peter from Hyperlipid, all of whom seem to make sense…and after telling everyone who asks you, “It’s the carbs!” well it takes a fair amount of courage to try something totally different from what you’ve believed it. Not everyone is into experimenting, especially if what they have been doing made their lives so much better than they were…



    • MC on March 18, 2014 at 23:50

      @Charles

      I know 2 girls who went very low carb, meat and leafy greens only, because their doctor told one of them to because she was pre-diabetic and her sister just followed along with the diet. For about a year and a half while I worked with one of them, I was their go-to-guy for learning about diet.

      I would often make recommendations like eating more fat (their LC doctor said to avoid it, LC WTF?), eating more salt, taking magnesium, vitamin D, etc…

      The recommendation that I had the most difficulty (though the salt thing was hard) getting them to follow was to start adding more starch into their diets. I told them about safe starches, I told them about the all potato diet, tried to get them to at least do a large refeed, and they would resist my information to the point I would get literally upset at them (partly cause I felt responsible for making them more entrenched in their LC beliefs starting out).

      One of them eventually, (the one I work with), told me she would at least do the refeeds, and maybe sometime have a potato with dinner. But just how entrenched they got in their low carb beliefs because of the success they did have with it, I don’t think I’ll ever recommend anyone go below 100 carbs a day, just as a precaution, if I ever give out advice to co-workers/friends again, even though I personally might go below 100 several days of the week.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 19, 2014 at 03:56

      Two separate things.

      1. Per the link, PS by itself won’t take one out of ketosis; but…

      2. It also doesn’t provide much in terms of FBG or blunting.

      For that, one needs to be out of ketosis, eating like a normal person and not a starving one. Do ketosis once per week as a 24-30 hour therapeutic fast, which I’m highly supportive of.



    • BrazilBrad on March 19, 2014 at 07:16

      Regardless of where someone is on the Keto/BHB curve, exercise will also help FBG and blunting via improved muscle insulin sensitivity. A reminder, also to self… get ass off chair and lift something.



    • DuckDodgers on March 19, 2014 at 13:01

      I just think you want to hate the guy, that’s all. He’s currently trying to “hack” RS, and has discussed his personal findings so far. That’s about it.

      I don’t hate Dave. He seems like a swell guy. I like some of the things he says. He usually tries to do the right thing. But I just don’t think his heart is in this one. He doesn’t seem to acknowledge the decades of research that support the need for maximizing fermentable fibers in the diet. In his article about RS, he is very wary about it. Ok fine, it’s good to be skeptical. We need people to be skeptical.

      But, if you’re going to be skeptical, don’t sit around and just talk about your rashes like they negate decades of research. Why not be skeptical about the research? Why not find research that shows why we should be skeptical? Why not use those negative reactions as clues to figure out why it doesn’t work for you?

      Dave mostly blamed his negative n=1 on the fact that his RS mediums were allegedly full of toxins rather than considering that his own leaky gut might be the problem that needs to be fixed. Frankly, I find that to be disappointing and disingenuous. It’s a copout.

      I think people give Dave a ‘pass’ because he has a soapbox and a podcast. If he were anybody trying to have a discussion about prebiotics, the consensus would be that the person who is overly sensitive to every prebiotic under the sun just has a very leaky gut.



    • DuckDodgers on March 19, 2014 at 13:20

      Perhaps Duck can enlighten us if there is more to it than than what has already been said

      The candida in the digestive tract appears to be mostly affected by the acidity/alkalinity of the digestive tract.

      http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2728

      So, a diet that’s low in fermentable fibers — particularly RS — will make the digestive tract more alkaline, since less acid-producing SCFAs are being fermented. And this will cause Candida to go from being a benign yeast found in nearly everyone to a “filamentous form” which is pathogenic (see first link). It’s believed this filamentous form will penetrate the gut barrier and allows Candida to enter the blood stream where it can feed on ketones or excess glucose.

      The trick to curing pathogenic Candida seems to be, as Sisson points out, is to eat PHD-levels of complex carbs. Not SAD levels (which would create excess glucose), and not too little which would create ketones. PHD-levels are a non-yeasty sweet spot in the middle that is readily absorbed by the body before Candida can claim much of it. Incorporating RS helps shift the pH balance from alkaline to more acid so that the Candida in the gut returns to its benign form. It sounds wonky but it worked particularly well for me.



    • DuckDodgers on March 19, 2014 at 14:02

      Oh and you need a biofilm disruptor too. Otherwise the Candida in the gut doesn’t really get exposed to the acidity from SCFAs



    • BrazilBrad on March 19, 2014 at 16:09

      Thats pretty much the answer I expected. Grasping at straws rather than seeing the obvious thing – the STRONG causal relationship between systemic candida infections and a compromised immune system and/or leaky gut. But no, it must be a less than perfect carb intake which ignores the hords of people who have imperfect carb intake (even the majority of LC-ish eaters) and no candida problems. OK, I concede that given a candida infection that LC could exacerbate the problem but the majority of candida problems come from too much sugar and simple carb consumption, so…



    • DuckDodgers on March 19, 2014 at 18:10

      BrazilBrad. Huh? A good chunk of LC dieters develop fungal infections. No, not all. But it does happen. I don’t know how that is “grasping at straws”. As Paul Jaminet explains:

      Paul Jaminet said:

      Low-carb diets generally improve immunity to bacteria and viruses, but not all is roses and gingerbread.

      Low-carb diets, alas, impair immunity to fungal and protozoal infections. The immune defense against these infections is glucose-dependent (as it relies on production of reactive oxygen species using glucose) and thyroid hormone-dependent (as thyroid hormone drives not only glucose availability, but also the availability of iodine for the myeloperoxidase pathway). Thus, anti-fungal immunity is downregulated on very low-carb diets.

      Moreover, eukaryotic pathogens such as fungi and protozoa can metabolize ketones. Thus, a ketogenic diet promotes growth and systemic invasion of these pathogens.

      As the fungal infection case studies on our “Results” page illustrate, low-carb dieters often develop fungal infections, and these often go away with increased starch consumption.

      Another issue is that mucus is essential for immunity at epithelial surfaces, and glycosylation is essential for the integrity of cellular junctions and tissue barriers such as the intestinal and blood-brain barriers. Thus, reduced production of mucus can impair intestinal immunity and promote gut dysbiosis or systemic infection by pathogens that enter through the gut.

      Finally, a very low-carb diet is not entirely free of risks of gut dysbiosis, and not just from fungal infections. Bacteria can metabolize the amino acid glutamine as well as mucosal sugars, so it is not possible to completely starve gut bacteria with a low-carb diet. Nor is it desirable, as this would eliminate a protective layer against systemic infection by pathogens that enter the body through the gut. As our “Results” page shows, several people who had gut trouble on the very low-carb (and generally excellent) GAPS diet were cured on our diet.

      You may think that’s grasping at straws, but I felt perfectly healthy before going low carb and what Jaminet describes is exactly what happened to me. Believe whatever you want, but people do get sick from low carb.



    • MC on March 19, 2014 at 21:42

      @Richard

      “2. It also doesn’t provide much in terms of FBG or blunting.

      For that, one needs to be out of ketosis, eating like a normal person and not a starving one. Do ketosis once per week as a 24-30 hour therapeutic fast, which I’m highly supportive of.”

      I guess you could say I usually eat like a normal person once a day, meat and sweet/white potatoes, some veggies, which is my only real meal, and it’s in the evening. The rest of the day, I’m doing very little eating, just a butter coffee in the morning, some dark chocolate, or nuts, in between. Maybe a little whey before I go to sleep unless I have it in the morning.

      Though I prefer to be in ketosis, as many days as possible, because I have OCD, so I think for some people, ketosis just once a week is not necessarily the best option.

      @DuckDodgers

      “But, if you’re going to be skeptical, don’t sit around and just talk about your rashes like they negate decades of research. Why not be skeptical about the research?”

      Because he isn’t skeptical about the research. He finds the research compelling. He believes RS does what people are saying it does.

      He just pointed out his own personal problem with the types of RS he has tried so far, which just seems like his usual issue with anything that might contain some form of mycotoxin, and he thinks there could be a potential problem with feeding bad bacteria, so you want to make sure you’ve got good bacteria.

      “rather than considering that his own leaky gut might be the problem that needs to be fixed.”

      Does he still have a leaky gut, or are you just assuming he does? I believe he said he fixed it when he introduced refeeds into his diet.



    • BrazilBrad on March 20, 2014 at 06:37

      @Duck, any chance of defining “a good chunk” with say a study result? Care to compare that to studies showing the vast majority of causes of candida infections? Didn’t think so. Nice circle back to your previous argument though.
      I do not doubt that some people can have various problems from steady-state long-duration VLC. I think it’s even plausible that most people can have problems with it. I agree that it’s not a logical or seemingly natural way to eat. That said, you cannot simply imply that similar problems occur with average carb consumption in the 50-100g range (ie, LC but not VLC or “severely restricted”). Well you can imply it, but it’s not very convincing without lots of data/evidence backing it up.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 07:39

      Does he still have a leaky gut, or are you just assuming he does? I believe he said he fixed it when he introduced refeeds into his diet.

      MC. Anyone who has that much sensitivity to everyday foods and everyday toxins has a leaky gut. If the gut barrier were fully intact, the toxins and allergens wouldn’t get through so easily.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 07:55

      any chance of defining “a good chunk” with say a study result? Care to compare that to studies showing the vast majority of causes of candida infections? Didn’t think so. Nice circle back to your previous argument though.

      What can I tell you, BrazilBrad. The studies haven’t been done. And probably never will. It’s called anecdotal evidence. If that gives you permission to ignore it, so be it. It’s your gut.

      I do not doubt that some people can have various problems from steady-state long-duration VLC. I think it’s even plausible that most people can have problems with it. I agree that it’s not a logical or seemingly natural way to eat. That said, you cannot simply imply that similar problems occur with average carb consumption in the 50-100g range (ie, LC but not VLC or “severely restricted”). Well you can imply it, but it’s not very convincing without lots of data/evidence backing it up.

      Yes. I’m just assuming that there’s a bell curve. We don’t really know where the bell curve evens out. Nobody does. If you want to live your life closer to the tipping point. Go for it! I won’t stop you.

      The more you feed the gut flora, the more you promote good bacteria taking over the gut and crowding out pathogens like fungus. So, we are talking about a curve. Low carb diets tend to be low in fermentable fibers. You can eat tons of cellulose-rich green vegetables all day but it will still be fairly difficult to obtain the level and variety of highly fermentable fibers needed to maximize cross-feeding and SCFA production. That’s where RS supplementation likely becomes crucial for those folks — since their diet is avoiding these beneficial foods — and that’s why we are having this discussion in the first place.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 08:45

      And in terms of looking for clues as to where this “bell curve” of fermentable carbs needed to grow a proper gut biome evens out, I’m looking at the “Carbohydrate Gap.” Real scientific data on the level of fermentable substrates needed to sustain the metabolism of the colonic microbiota…

      David L Topping and Peter M Clifton said:

      “The “carbohydrate gap” is the discrepancy between NSP intakes and calculations of bacterial activity of the large bowel microflora and supports a significant contribution by RS. Individuals in affluent westernized countries may consume up to 28 g NSP/day. However, much larger quantities, possibly as much as 80 g, of fermentable carbohydrate are needed to sustain the biomass and account for SCFA production, and NSP may only provide 25% of that requirement. […]

      “In humans, RS and OS could close the carbohydrate gap, but consumption of OS appears to be self-limiting due to osmotic effects and may contribute only 5–10 g/day.”

      And another explanation of the “carbohydrate gap”:

      Teresa M Paeschke and William R Aimutis said:

      In the large bowel, resistant starch is a highly fermentable dietary fiber. In fact, resistant starch is believed to be the most significant contributor to colonic short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) production (Bird et al., 2000, Toping and Clifton, 2001). This is based on estimations that 60-80g/day of fermentable substrate are needed to sustain the metabolism of the colonic microbiota; yet dietary fiber consumption in Westernized countries is rarely above 20 g/day (Institute of Medicine, 2002a). Oligosaccharides, endogenous secretions, and indigestible protein may contribute some fermentable substrate, but resistant starch is believed to contribute to the majority of this “carbohydrate gap” (Topping et al., 2003, Nugent, 2005).

      So, when people go low carb, they tend to eat a lot of cellulose and perhaps some inulin and FOS. But cellulose just doesn’t cut it. You don’t get a lot of butyrate fermentation out of it. You can try to eat insane levels of onions and garlic to up the FOS and inulin, but they aren’t very “bulletproof” vegetables (apparently they cause some kind of brain interference) and Jeff Leach is the only person I know of who literally eats an onion a day. The best bang for your buck in terms of fermentation and microbiome support appears to come from raw low-toxin carbs, cooked-n-cooled fermentable carbs, and to a lesser extent cooked complex carbs, but of course admitting that fact requires an acknowledgement that eating lots of those fermentable complex carbs are a natural way to eat.

      And finally, every low carb culture (and low carb animals for that matter) ate their meats raw. Cooking wasn’t used unless carbs were available and prevalent in the diet. Raw meats appear to require less energy to break down and assimilate since they include all of their pre-formed components and enzymes. And raw animal parts are full of prebiotic glycans and are obviously covered with meat-hungry probiotics ready to break down those glycans. The Westernized, cooked, low carb version is a very new experiment and is nothing like the low carb diets from indigenous carnivorous cultures. Cooking denatures the beneficial properties of meats that allowed carnivorous cultures to be low carb and maintain their health.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 08:50

      Sorry, that should have read, Jeff Leach is the only person I know of who literally tries to eat a raw onion a day. Cooking onions/vegetables denatures the fermentable fibers in them.



    • BrazilBrad on March 20, 2014 at 08:50

      @Duck, Sisson’s “fat burning” mode recommendation is 80g carbs per day. That is around two medium sized potatoes each-and-every-day. Now lets say you were to eat those cooked and cooled to maximize the RS… plus… you eat a variety of other essentially zero-net-carb veggies with lots of fiber. Eating something like this either steady state or in a bumpy manner that averaged out the same – is kinda hard for me to believe that it would be unhealthy. Maybe it would be less than some ideal amount of RS per day (30-40g?). So we supp with potato starch because we never eat RS-heavy raw, or minimally roasted, cassava and other tubers like our ancestors probably did.



    • Bernhard on March 20, 2014 at 09:00

      DuckDodgers

      Biofilm disruptors.
      1) Any dangers involved (known ones) with disrupting biofilms? (thinking of leaky gut things and candida possibly being there in the first place for a reason – be that reason
      commensal, opportunistic or pathogenic (the differences I personally view more a matter of interpretation any how).
      2) What kind of biofilm disruptors are known and which ones of them would be the most gentle ones?
      Thanks,
      Peace.



    • BrazilBrad on March 20, 2014 at 09:07

      Good points Ducky, thanks for that.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 09:15

      BrazilBrad, yeah.. I think Sisson is on the right track. He seems to have done his research. And I’m not sure he intends for “fat burning” mode to be a long term solution either, but you’d have to check in with him on that!



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 09:47

      Bernhard, I really don’t know about dangers. And I think that Candida isn’t something one “eliminates”, but rather makes benign and, well, not overgrown.

      The PHD helped me tremendously, but in terms of protocol, biofilm disruptors and how RS fits into it, I recommend checking out this excellent resource:

      http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/09/16/how-to-eliminate-candida-biofilms/



    • BrazilBrad on March 20, 2014 at 10:21

      @Duck, one of those studies you posted claimed that undigested proteins present in the colon affects RS butyrate production (in rats mind you). It increases it. That could really complicate the idea of pinning down an ideal prebiotic/RS number especially for protein heavy eaters. The studies use resistant vegetable proteins (rice, soy, potato, etc.) to ensure they reach the colon but I wonder how a protein heavy diet in general, which also contains prebiotics/RS, is affected by this.

      A couple of them below.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15287681
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17166881



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 11:50

      BrazilBrad,

      Interesting. Though, the researchers appear to be using “digestion-resistant protein” (aka “resistant proteins”). Sounds like they are using raw, undenatured glycoproteins extracted from various vegetables — which would be similar to the compounds we find in freshly-killed raw meats.

      Most modern low carbers tend to eat meats that are aged/chilled for days and then cooked, which pretty much breaks down and removes most of the resistant proteins (bacteria literally degrade those glycoproteins, which tenderizes the meat) . So, I don’t think ‘resistant protein’ really applies to modern low carbers that much. Really interesting though!



    • MC on March 20, 2014 at 12:16

      @DuckDodgers

      “Anyone who has that much sensitivity to everyday foods and everyday toxins has a leaky gut. If the gut barrier were fully intact, the toxins and allergens wouldn’t get through so easily.”

      Somehow, I think you’re just saying that. Just say “I don’t know” or “I’m taking a wild guess.”

      Dave apparently already did an interview with Grace, and is working on one with Richard soon. Maybe Richard will bring it up, why he has all those problems with toxins?



    • BrazilBrad on March 20, 2014 at 14:24

      @Duck, yeah but the implication, at least to me, is that any proteins that reach the colon *could* have a positive effect depending on quantity and amino acid profile (since they saw differing effects based on protein type). So it’s plausible that proteins from nuts, seeds, and perhaps even some meats (connective tissue?) could have an effect depending on quantity eaten and maybe fat content. Basically anything that impedes digestion and keeps it from being 100% digested in the upper GI. I’m not gonna speculate given these are rat studies and as you pointed out they’re using isolated proteins, but it makes for some interesting future investigation.



    • DuckDodgers on March 20, 2014 at 15:41

      Agreed. I guess low carbers would need to figure out how much protein was escaping their digestion. Looks like in these rat studies they are overfeeding these rodents a ridiculous amount of resistant protein (15%!). Maybe I’m reading that wrong, but I’m not sure that’s realistic. Of course, if a lot of protein is escaping a low carber’s digestion, then that’s not necessarily a good thing either — I would think they wouldn’t be getting the protein calories they need for GNG.

      I dunno. I’m sure some protein escapes digestion, but it’s hard to say that it’s a lot if the person is just eating muscle meat. However, I think this could explain why fresh raw meat diets might enhance SCFA production. And collagens, skin and cartilage tend to be the most “resistant” proteins.

      Actually, come to think of it… I’d be willing to bet that eating skin, cartilage and/or taking collagen hydrolysate (as well as bone broths) — which all appears to contain a good amount of resistant proteins — might indeed have that synergistic effect with RS!!



  11. Jer on March 11, 2014 at 09:22

    I think he has good intentions. I just don’t think he is overly bright. He tried cold thermogenesis and gave himself first degree burns over 15% of his body. Reason: he fell asleep with ice packs on his body and got frostbite.

  12. Rite rain on March 10, 2014 at 19:32

    Has anyone ever seen the 300 lb asprey? I’m calling bullshit on almost all things he spouts

  13. Ray on March 11, 2014 at 05:07

    Richard- I listened to the podcast and thought it was ok. I like Mark and his site he does have a vast amount of good information but hes still wrong on many fronts. I know you agree with his carb curve but it really only is applicable for people that are sedentary. To say “insidious weight gain” if you eat more than 300g is such bullshit that is purely n=1 more than anything rooted in science. I used to be a devout paleo follower and thought eating carbs was the equivalent of injecting heroin. Silly me…Lastly I can’t help but feel Dave has one agenda and that is to promote his products. This is fine of course but when he calls himself a “scientist” I have to laugh. Dude you read some studies and make blanket statements, relax. Oh also, does anyone else feel like he has had every single medical condition this side of the Mississippi? If he truly had Lyme disease he wouldn’t have been able to cure it by eating fat.

  14. Jer on March 11, 2014 at 14:54

    http://www.anti-agingfirewalls.com/2013/12/01/nuts-over-nuts/

    Has anybody seen this? Long article on nuts but goes into how our gut biome fed by butyrate evolved to supress enzymes in our cells that cause cancer and aging. Basically, a HDAC inhibitor. Again, long article, skim down to reason 6 to eat nuts. Claims to be a good source of R.S., hence butyrate. At least thats what I got out of it. Pretty technical stuff . . .

    • Chupo on March 13, 2014 at 04:52

      Every low-carber should be eating nuts. When I first started supplementing with PS, I didn’t get the symptoms I expected. I had a little bit more gas at first but nothing like what others report. I suspect my high nut consumption kept my gut bugs fed.



    • DuckDodgers on March 14, 2014 at 12:35

      Hard to believe that large quantities of wild nuts were eaten before they were domesticated a few thousand years ago. The only well known wild nuts that aren’t poisonous (that I can think of offhand) are hickory nuts, chestnuts, walnuts, pecans, dates and only 3 of the 16 varieties of macadamia nuts. The overwhelming majority of nuts had to be domesticated or processed in some way to make them safe for humans. Except for walnuts, most nuts tend to have a lot of Omega-6 and a fair amount of allergens.

      None of that should be construed as evidence for not eating nuts — though I can think of a few reasons for not eating them in large quantities. They make a good snack though.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 14, 2014 at 14:13

      Pine nuts. Used to get them straight out of the cone & roast ’em with my grandparents when I was a kid.

      Some varieties though, especially from China, cause “pine mouth” which I’ve had twice and is awful (I posted about it). Kills your taste buds so you can’t taste anything for about 2 weeks. First time I had it I had no idea what was up. Second time, I was able to correlate it to pine nuts, did some digging.



    • Chupo on March 14, 2014 at 15:25

      There is a post somewhere on Whole Health Source about glucose tolerance of hunter-gathers. The !Kung San had poor glucose tolerance compared to the others. It turns out their staple was Mongogo nuts, which are quite high in PUFA. They have the fatty acid profile more like a seed than than a nut. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongongo

      I don’t trust anything from China. I saw tinned mackerel at the Dollar Tree. I was curious as to how old it might be and why it was there so I Iooked at the label and saw it was from China. No wonder it’s being sold there.



    • Adrienne on March 14, 2014 at 16:56

      @Chupo — I think you’re correct. Unfortunately, the fear mongering about omega-6 and mineral leaching phytic acid paranoia wiped decent rs in the form of raw nuts off the map for way too many low carbers. I can easily digest raw nuts — no gastric problems — quite the opposite and they keep things moving nicely. For people who can’t digest them, perhaps the problem lies with their guts, not the nuts. Dr. Davis had a blog post ages ago about how raw nuts are not as fattening as their dry roasted counterparts despite same number of calories. I didn’t know anything about rs then but now think that’s likely one of the reasons.



  15. […] Mark let the cat out of the bag in terms of who's likely to be publishing the book Tim and I have been working on since early […]

  16. Carlr on March 13, 2014 at 07:22

    Richard and Tatertot, I’ve been paying a lot of attention to your discussions on resistant starch and am looking forward to your book. I was doing internet research on my blood pressure problem this morning and ran across this study that discusses microbiota, SCFA, olfactory receptors, and blood pressure and thought I would share. Cutting edge stuff that you and others testing RS might be interested in.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23401498

    • tatertot on March 13, 2014 at 08:48

      Carlr – Good find! Full text, too.

      What I find most interesting about the study you linked is that it fills a hole for me. The SCFA’s we discuss mainly from gut bugs are butyrate, acetate, and propionate. Butyrate and acetate we’ve looked at and have a good idea what they do…Propionate has always been a big question mark. The study you linked shows a nice link between propionate and blood pressure/renal control. I think that is just fascinating.

      From the study:

      “We found that propionate administration lowers BP in a rapid, reproducible, and dose-dependent manner.”

      “…these data suggest that propionate and possibly acetate generated by the gut microbiota are able to modulate blood pressure through their effects on multiple receptors and pathways.”

      “This cross-talk between the gut microbiota and the renal–cardiovascular system constitutes a unique pathway that may be relevant to the pathogenesis and treatment of hypertension.”



  17. Carlr on March 13, 2014 at 10:27

    Thanks Tim. Additionally, see this:
    http://2013.igem.org/Team:HUST-China/Project

  18. smokes on March 13, 2014 at 10:47

    Hi Richard.

    In these days i started experimenting with cyclical nutritional ketosis to see if i get all the benefits all the people talk about.

    Will supplementing daily with 1-2 tbs of Potato Starch be useless on this diet, if i’m eating safe starches only once a week?

    Thanks.

  19. Chupo on March 13, 2014 at 17:23

    Have you seen this one? Take a look at how this diabetes med works. Acarbose.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9164992

    Basically, it makes carbs resistant to digestion so they get to the colon where they are fermented to SCFA.

  20. Dave Asprey on March 19, 2014 at 22:30

    Richard! Just found this thread…when are you coming on the Bulletproof Show? Can’t wait to pick your brains on this. 🙂

    • Richard Nikoley on March 19, 2014 at 22:51

      Dave:

      I’m at your service. Any time you like. I’ll shoot you an email.



    • MC on March 19, 2014 at 23:09

      He must have read the comments section lol

      Looking forward to this one.



    • Richard Nikoley on March 19, 2014 at 23:18

      I just learned from Grace that he just finished an episode with her.



Leave a Comment





Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
YouTube798
YouTube
Follow by Email8k
RSS780