About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 10:53amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I trust used car salesman more than I trust doctors nowadays. This news item is definitely not new knowledge. If people just pay attention to their diets, they know what foods raise their sugar and what ones don't.

My parents are 75 and 72 and both take insulin. Two of my older brothers are also taking insulin, and they are 53 and 47. I am the youngest in the family and have told them defiantly that it will never happen to me.

I spend probably six to eight hours a week at Gold's Gym. Since 22 May 2005, I have drunk nothing but water. I have lately lost some body fat. This is due to a high-protein diet combined with some fruits and vegetables.

One book which really influenced me is The Abs Diet. Most importantly, the book emphasizes body fat loss not weight loss. It also makes you feel like you can really do it.

I have set a goal of 10% body fat and still need to work toward that. But I know it can be done. Lance Armstrong is 6% body fat, by the way.

The most important thing I did was start wearing a workout belt again. Ultimately, the belt forces me to pay attention to my waist line. It makes me aware of it every time I go to Gold's. I also think it may even rub it off.

I'm happy that the American public is becoming more aware of the dangers of trans fat, etc. A dietician (back when I was in high school) said it best: "You have to get back to nature." The best foods like fruits and vegetables are close to nature. The worst foods like potato chips are the furthest away.

For the occasional snack, I keep a box of Lean Body Gold protein bars in my car. They are about $2 each, but really help me when I need a lift. Most importantly, they keep me from fast food.

I have also been consuming lots of whey. My favorite is definitely Designer Whey. It's a quick drink and keeps from eating less nutritious foods. Unfortunately, it also makes me even hungrier.

You really have to read the labels on whey. I have found whey with artificial junk like Splenda in it. I always judge whey by how much it clumps. If it clumps a lot, it has a lot of crap in it. Good whey should not clump.

It's typical of the medical experts to recommend that people simply take pills or shots to "solve" a problem. Insulin just deals with the symptoms of diabetes. A good diet with low body fat is the cure.

There is more economic incentive to prescribe a treatment than a cure. If you have diabetes, you will always be visiting the doctor regularly. You will also have to buy your insulin. That means more money for doctors and more money for drug companies. Doctors are only interested in keeping you alive and sick so they can treat you, until you run out of money.


Post 1

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 11:36amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for the tips, Chris!  Enrolled fulltime at two colleges, I rely on "snacks" from my car, but make that mixed nuts, protein bars, and hamburgers than I cook at home and pack.  My diet contains starch, of course, but I stay close to proteins, especially meats, and then vegetables and fruits.
 
As a result of Robert Malcom's recommendations, I read Jane Jacobs on Cities and then went back to the original Scientific American articles about Çatal Hüyük.  Not surprisingly, the individuals in this successful -- and apparently peaceful -- neolithic city (and it was a city) enjoyed a widely varied diet of game, hard seeds, etc.
 
More than anything, it is the variation in diet.  When I eat "starches" as "prepared food" it is likely in the form of one cup of instant lentil with one cup of instant split pea -- and something like that is the exception when caught away from home on a long day.
 
For that matter, I am just as likely to choose to go hungry.  I learned long ago -- 7th grade health or something -- that if you ignore hunger pangs, they go away.  They come back, of course, but you can ignore them.  Eventually -- like a day or two -- you need to eat, of course... but eight hours without food won't kill  you -- and in fact, is good.  You gotta burn off some of that accumulation and replace it with new calories.
 
Anyway, thanks again, Chris for the help on "good whey" and thanks to Ed for the link to the news story!
 


Post 2

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 11:38amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Chris,

I applaud your fitness efforts.

But two comments: There are some problems associated with a body-fat percentage that is too low. Evolution designed us to have a fat reserve. That fat reserve is part of a metabolic feedback loop. I'm not knowledgeable enough in this area to say whether the optimum is 10% or 15% - but I figure you might want to research it.

I have no doubt that there are a lot of sleazy doctors out there. But, I've known a lot of doctors and most of them were very honest and would never participate in any kind of scam or take money for anything that the person didn't really need.

I participated in the design of some software that automated the clinical practice guidelines for diabetes for the military - and a lot of doctors worked long hard hours, for no extra money or recognition, to improve the quality of care through that software interface.



Post 3

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 12:36pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Good responses.

As to Chris' post-prandial hunger (after whey protein) -- I suggest trying a casein protein supplement, such as Twinlab's PM Fuel.

As to Michael's self-imposed, 8-hour fasts -- it probably won't hurt, but it more than likely won't "help" either. Though everyone fasts for 8 hours everyday (when sleeping; overnight), optimal daytime meal-spacing is probably more like 3-6 hours. Different foods digest at different rates, with a piece of fruit taking about an hour, and a fatty steak taking up to 6 hours. Drugs and alcohol also affect digestion.

The main point is to try to eat at least 3 times in one day, in order to optimize micronutrient delivery. The vitamin C in your morning piece of fruit, has lost 99% of its potential at elevating your blood levels of vitamin C by nightfall, if not sooner (perhaps even by midday). It's not about keeping "cleaned out" or about burning off the last meal's Calories first, it's about a third main reason that we eat food ...

1) hunger (pain)
2) taste (pleasure)
3) nutrition

As to Steve's curiosity about essential body fat, this relevant Wikipedia entry seems accurate.
 
 Ed


Post 4

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 1:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yea... I think 10% is too low. 14-17% seems like a much healthier target in general, although some people might do better with up to 25%.

Post 5

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 - 11:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
In Defense of the Conventional Wisdom.

Contrary to the article, I support the very low-fat, high complex-carbohydrate diet favored by the current medical establishment.

It should be recognized, however, that that approach as well as the one favored by the article can reduce the need for exogenous insulin. The less sugar you feed your body, the less it has to absorb and consequently the less insulin it will need. By the same token, the less fat you consume, the more sensitive your body will be to the insulin it does produce and the less insulin it will need. Dietary fat interferes with the action of insulin, making the insulin less effective and increasing the amount needed to metabolize the sugar, which is why the medical establishment recommends a high-complex carbohydrate diet for diabetics.

A study done many years ago demonstrated rather dramatically the effect of dietary fat on blood sugar levels. Normal non-diabetic subjects were fed a very high-fat diet for two days, then given a glucose challenge test, with the result that their blood sugars all tested in the diabetic range. Their glucoses were sky high. These same subjects were then switched to a very low-fat, high-carb diet consisting of white bread, bananas, honey, potatoes, rice, etc. -- all very high glycemic foods -- for two days. They were then given the same glucose challenge, and all tested in the normal range.

I, myself, follow a high-carb, low-fat diet, and my fasting (as well as random) glucose is normally around 70 mg/dL which is superb for someone my age (66). None of the people I know, many of whom are much younger than I, has a fasting glucose that even comes close to that. All of their fasting glucoses are 90 or above. A friend of mine, who has type-2 diabetes, which required insulin, went on the high-carb, low-fat diet I recommended and brought her glucose into the normal range, allowing her to go off insulin entirely.

She might have been able to achieve similar results with a higher fat, low carb diet, but she prefers the higher carb, low-fat diet, and is managing her diabetes just fine on it. I also think that the low-fat, higher carb diet is superior in other respects. In addition to keeping my glucose low by improving my insulin's sensitivity, it has lowered my blood pressure and cholesterol.

Before rejecting the medical establishment's approach to diabetes, one should learn the rationale behind it, something which the article does not address.

- Bill



Post 6

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 1:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bill?!

[no, not REALLY surprised]  ;-)

Leave it to you to get me to hijack my own thread (see below).  ;-) 

Alright, Bill, we've been around the block on this issue. Can I get you to agree to one over-arching research question? The low/high-carb issue would be "settled" if we knew what % of the folks trying each diet gained success, right? Do you agree? Do you agree that the type of diet that works for more people more of the time -- is the "best" diet (BECAUSE of its differential success)? If you can agree to that, then you will retain my attention on this matter.

What low-carb diets do to you: They either extend your healthspan (the time-to-disease), decrease your healthspan, or don't change your healthspan. This thread was about diabetes, but I now digress ...

Effects of a carbohydrate-restricted diet with and without supplemental soluble fiber on plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and other clinical markers of cardiovascular risk.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jan;92(1):284-92. Epub 2006 Oct 24.

Wood RJ,
  • Fernandez ML,
  • Sharman MJ,
  • Silvestre R,
  • Greene CM,
  • Zern TL,
  • Shrestha S,
  • Judelson DA,
  • Gomez AL,
  • Kraemer WJ,
  • Volek JS.
  •  

    Carbohydrate-restricted diets (CRDs) promote weight loss, reductions in plasma triacylglycerol (TAG) levels, and increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels but may cause undesirable low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) responses in some people. The objective of the present study was to determine the effect of adding soluble fiber to a CRD on plasma LDL-C and other traditionally measured markers of cardiovascular disease.

     

    Using a parallel-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 30 overweight and obese men (body mass index, 25-35 kg/m(2)) were randomly assigned to supplement a CRD with soluble fiber (Konjac-mannan, 3g/d) (n = 15) or placebo (n = 15). Plasma lipids, anthropometrics, body composition, blood pressure, and nutrient intake were evaluated at baseline and at 6 and 12 weeks. Compliance was excellent as assessed by 7-day weighed dietary records and ketonuria. Both groups experienced decreases in (P < .01) body weight, percent body fat, systolic blood pressure, waist circumference, and plasma glucose levels.

     

    After 12 weeks, HDL-C and TAG improved significantly in the fiber (10% and -34%) and placebo (14%, -43%) groups. LDL-C decreased by 17.6% (P < .01) at week 6 and 14.1% (P < .01) at week 12 in the fiber group. Conversely, LDL-C reductions were significant in the placebo group only after 12 weeks (-6.0%, P < .05).

     

    We conclude that although clearly effective at lowering LDL-C, adding soluble fiber to a CRD during active and significant weight loss provides no additional benefits to the diet alone. Furthermore, a CRD led to clinically important positive alterations in cardiovascular disease risk factors.

     

    PMID: 17161227 [PubMed - in process]

     

    Recap:

    A low-carb diet decreased the risk for heart disease (the #1 cause of premature death) by at least 20% -- in those who were overweight (and 2 thirds of us are "overweight").

     

    High-fat/low-carbohydrate diet reduces insulin-stimulated carbohydrate oxidation but stimulates nonoxidative glucose disposal in humans: an important role for skeletal muscle pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase 4. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jan;92(1):284-92. Epub 2006 Oct 24.

     

    Chokkalingam K,

  • Jewell K,
  • Norton L,
  • Littlewood J,
  • van Loon LJ,
  • Mansell P,
  • Macdonald IA,
  • Tsintzas K.

  • Aim: The aim of this report was to study the effect of high-fat (HF)/low-carbohydrate (CHO) diet on regulation of substrate metabolism in humans.

     

    Methods: Ten healthy men consumed either a HF (75% energy as fat) or control (35%) diet for 6 d in random order. On d 7, blood glucose disappearance rate (R(d)) was determined before and during a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp. Substrate oxidation was determined by indirect calorimetry. Muscle biopsies were obtained prediet, postdiet, and postclamps.

     

    Results: R(d) was similar under basal conditions but slightly elevated ( approximately 10%, P < 0.05) during the last 30 min of the clamp after the HF diet. HF diet reduced CHO oxidation under basal (by approximately 40%, P < 0.05) and clamp conditions (by approximately 20%, P < 0.05), increased insulin-mediated whole-body nonoxidative glucose disposal (by 30%, P < 0.05) and muscle glycogen storage (by approximately 25%, P < 0.05). Muscle pyruvate dehydrogenase complex activity was blunted under basal and clamp conditions after HF compared with control (P < 0.05) and was accompanied by an approximately 2-fold increase (P < 0.05) in pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase 4 (PDK4) mRNA and protein expression.

     

    Conclusion: Short-term HF/low-CHO dietary intake did not induce whole-body insulin resistance, but caused a shift in im glucose metabolism from oxidation to glycogen storage. Insulin-stimulated CHO oxidation and muscle pyruvate dehydrogenase complex activity were blunted after the HF diet. Up-regulation of muscle PDK4 expression was an early molecular adaptation to these changes, and we showed for the first time in healthy humans, unlike insulin-resistant individuals, that insulin can suppress PDK4 but not PDK2 gene expression in skeletal muscle.

     

    PMID: 17062764 [PubMed - in process]

    Recap:

    A high-fat/low-carb diet increased insulin sensitivity (i.e. whole-body nonoxidative glucose disposal) in healthy men.

    Caloric intake and Alzheimer's disease. Experimental approaches and therapeutic implications. Interdiscip Top Gerontol. 2007;35:159-75.

    Pasinetti GM,
  • Zhao Z,
  • Qin W,
  • Ho L,
  • Shrishailam Y,
  • Macgrogan D,
  • Ressmann W,
  • Humala N,
  • Liu X,
  • Romero C,
  • Stetka B,
  • Chen L,
  • Ksiezak-Reding H,
  • Wang J.

  • Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a rapidly growing public health concern with potentially devastating effects. Presently, there are no known cures or effective preventive strategies. While genetic factors are relevant in early-onset cases, they appear to play less of a role in late-onset sporadic AD cases, the most common form of AD. Due to the fact that the disease typically strikes very late in life, delaying symptoms could be as good as a cure for many people. For example, it is now widely accepted that if the onset of the disease could be delayed by even 5 years, the incidence could be cut in half. Both clinical and epidemiological evidence suggests that modification of lifestyle factors such as nutrition may prove crucial to AD management given the mounting experimental evidence suggesting that brain cells are remarkably responsive to "what somebody is doing".

     

     Among other nongenetic factors influencing AD, recent studies strongly support the evidence that caloric intake may play a role in the relative risk for AD clinical dementia. Indeed, the effect of diet in AD has been an area of research that has produced promising results, at least experimentally. Most importantly, as mechanistic pathways are defined and their biochemical functions scrutinized, the evidence supporting a direct link between nutrition and AD neuropathology continues to grow. Our work, as well as that of others, has recently resulted in the development of experimental dietary regimens that might promote, attenuate or even reverse features of AD.

     

    Most remarkably, while we found that high caloric intake based on saturated fat promotes AD type Beta-amyloidosis, conversely we found that dietary restriction based on reduced carbohydrate intake is able to prevent it. This evidence is very exciting and is, in part, consistent with current epidemiological studies suggesting that obesity and diabetes are associated with a >4-fold increased risk of developing AD. The clarification of the mechanisms through which dietary restriction may beneficially influence AD neuropathology and the eventual discovery of future "mimetics" capable of anti-Beta-amyloidogenic activity will help in the development of "lifestyle therapeutic strategies" in AD and possibly other neurodegenerative disorders.

     

    PMID: 17063038 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    Recap:

    Restricting carbs is your best bet for preventing what I call the "walking-death" (Alzheimer's disease). One researcher once said that, if you live long enough, you will get Alzheimer's disease (or Parkinson's). Brain aging is often thought to be out of human control. My aim is to prove this researcher wrong. Perhaps I ought to introduce, for the first time, a new concept: mind-span (the time-to-consciousness-loss). Step #1: To maximize your mind-span, control your carb intake. 100 grams or less per day of non-fiber carbohydrate -- would be a good start.

     

    ;-)

     

    Ed

     


    Post 7

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 3:20amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Chris, I drink EAS Whey Protein (French Vanilla flavor!) shakes 2-3 times a day, depending on whether I lift weights once or twice each day... One after each workout, and one before bed. One scoop has 23g of protein, so I do abut a scoop and half (I have heard the human body can process about 35 grams of protein every two hours). Just blend with milk, they are delicous. I do not get hungry, however I do eat about every two hours. Other than the shakes, I get protein from: 1 - peanut butter and jelly on wheat; 1 - tuna salad (1 whle can white chunk tuna in water, light mayonnaise) on wheat; and 1 - ziplock bag unsalted dry rasted peanuts. If you don't like the tuna sandwhich, get a can of tuna, dump it on a bag of lettuce, add crutons etc (sunflower seeds are good for protein), and smother it in ranch. I have yet to find a protein bar that I didn't find absolutely disgusting. Als, I have heard that bananas are actually protein blockers, not sure if this is true. On the weekends I get my breakfast prtein frm eggs, however, on weekdays I don't have the time, so I settle for oatmeal (good fiber, not much protein). I also try to do cardio at least three times a week (not counting racquetball, and the vlleyball league I play in).

    P.S. My O key is sticking sometimes and I stopped caring halfway through this post.


    Post 8

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 6:28amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    I'm not against carbohydrates by any means. A good diet is one that distinguishes between good carbohydrates and bad carbohydrates.

    I'm inclined to include most breads (especially the most processed ones) in the list of bad carbohydrates. Bad carbohydrates include potato chips, pizza, and maybe pasta.


    Post 9

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 6:38amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit

    The first thing I would do is add red grapes or red wine to your diet, resveratrol, a compound found in the highest concentrations of skins of red grapes grown in cold climates, was found in a study recently published in nature to have the same effects on health and aging that a major caloric restriction with optimal nutrition diet does. Resveratrol so far has had the same effect on every animal tested.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/science/02winecnd.html?ex=1168578000&en=00ad489ba9f58f04&ei=5070

    http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/news/ng.asp?id=71767-resveratrol-red-wine-survival

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7117/abs/nature05354.html#


    Post 10

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 7:09amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Jonathan, white albacore tuna is typically mercury-toxic (reference available upon request) -- you might hurt yourself continuing to eat it. I choose sardines. Sardines are smaller fish, lower on the food chain, and don't accumulate mercury like tuna does.

    Chris, good points.

    Michael, reseveratrol -- the molecule which likely explains the French Paradox -- is indeed a heavy-hitter in health (good find, Michael!); but it is not alone in this regard. Another key nutrient is long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (from fish), which are as likely to improve your healthspan as resveratrol is. Folks do like their magic bullets, especially when they come with cool names. Resveratrol sounds like the name for an out-of-this-world super-hero! What's THAT up in the sky? Why, it's Resveratrol, coming to save the day!   ;-)

    Resveratrol does counter some of the bad effects of suboptimal dieting, but so does omega-3 fats, B-complex, magnesium, vitamin C, etc. A healthier way to look at supplementation is to establish an evidence-based hierarchy (rather than to pin hopes on a magic-bullet).

    Ed



    Post 11

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 7:50amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Thanks Ed for you comments. Yeah I was initially highly skeptical of Resveratrol *because* of it's name (it's waay to close to "reverse" for me) but after reading much about it I am convinced it is a good thing. I am not going to take it at the doses requried from this mice study until more safety effects are known, but I eat about a cup of red grapes a day now (good thing because I really like red grapes!)

    I am contemplating starting to consume a little alchohol, red wine, due to my families history of heart disease, which moderate amounts of alchohol help. As a person who has never consumed alchohol, its a tough call. But given the likely health benefits of resveratrol, the french paradox, and the effect very moderate drinking has on reducing heart disease I think I am a red wine drinker now...

    Speaking of 'paradoxes' I have also read of the 'Asian Paradox' where people in china, for instance, smoke more than americans do yet have much lower incidents of cancer related to smoking. Some people say that it is because of the green tea so many of them drinking, but I also recently read a study that said they consumed less than half the processed sugars americans do.

    Do you know of any other interesting 'paradoxes' or interesting culturally / geographics observations relating to health and populations of that sort? I know of the centerians in Okinawa as well from reading alot about CRON diets.

    Also, you seem very knowledgeable regarding diets, what would you pick as the top 3 or 5 supplements or food that you would make sure and add to your diet? Not that I would use your thinking to replace mine, just looking for a starting point for researching these things!

    Thanks!

    Michael F Dickey

    Post 12

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 7:57amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Restricting carbs is your best bet for preventing what I call the "walking-death" (Alzheimer's disease). One researcher once said that, if you live long enough, you will get Alzheimer's disease (or Parkinson's).


    Taking small doses of Jumex or Deprenyl shows a significant chance of seriously delaying or preventing all together the onset of alzheimers.

    Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
    Post 13

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 11:11amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Michael, there are about 6 physiologic ways in which we "age" ourselves ...

    oxidation
    degradation
    inflammation
    glycation
    methylation (actually, a deficiency of hepatic methylation)
    hypertension

    Some supplements to off-set each process are as follows ...

    oxidation -- vitamins C & E (taking at least twice as many mg's of C as IUs of E -- the C regenerates "used-up" E)
    degradation -- ample protein
    inflammation -- either 2-5 fish meals per week; or fish oil supplements
    glycation -- a multiple vitamin containing at least 200 mcg of chromium
    methylation -- either a B-complex; or, specifically, B-6, B-12, and Folic Acid
    hypertension -- either 5-10 servings of fruits and veggies; or, specifically, potassium and magnesium supplements

    As for other diet-disease paradoxes, the high-fat/low heart disease diet of the Inuit comes to mind, as well as the heart-protective meat-based diet of aboriginal peoples in Africa and Australia. There seems to be more in the back of my mind, though I can't currently bring them to consciousness ...

    ;-)

    Ed


    Post 14

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 11:14amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Taking small doses of Jumex or Deprenyl shows a significant chance of seriously delaying or preventing all together the onset of alzheimers.
    Right. Trick is in getting the Rx, though (or in 'getting around' the whole prescription drug process -- IF you know what I mean).

    ;-)

    Ed


    Post 15

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 1:49pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Gee Ed - you guys really like that mulberry bush, huh.......;-)

    Post 16

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 2:18pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    ;-))
    (Edited by Ed Thompson on 1/10, 2:20pm)


    Post 17

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 7:15pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Jonathan, white albacore tuna is typically mercury-toxic (reference available upon request) -- you might hurt yourself continuing to eat it. I choose sardines. Sardines are smaller fish, lower on the food chain, and don't accumulate mercury like tuna does.
    I was aware of the mercury issue... My wife is pregnant and must avoid tuna. I woud appreciate the reference nonetheless. Thanks!

    Post 18

    Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 7:29pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Here you go, Jonathan ...

    Toxic Tuna

     



    Mercury in canned tuna: white versus light and temporal variation. Environ Res. 2004 Nov;96(3):239-49.

     

    Burger J, Gochfeld M.

     

    We analyzed 168 cans individually for total mercury. All values are reported as parts per million (= microg/g) on a wet weight basis. In a subset of samples analyzed for total and inorganic mercury, the inorganic mercury was below detection levels; hence at least 89% of the mercury can be considered methylmercury.

     

    … white-style tuna had significantly more total mercury (mean 0.407 ppm) than light-style tuna (mean 0.118 ppm), presumably reflecting that "white" tuna is albacore, a species relatively larger than the skipjack tuna, which is commonly available as "light" or "chunk light." The maximum mercury in a can was 0.997 ppm [Ed’s note: this is ~100mcg mercury/100grams of tuna!], but 25% of white tuna samples exceeded 0.5 ppm.

     

    Data suggest a slight increase in levels since 1991, and mercury levels were significantly higher in 2001 than in other years. The mean level of mercury in white tuna (mean 0.407 ppm) was significantly higher than the mean value of 0.17 ppm currently used by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in its risk assessment and public information.

     

    There were no significant differences in mercury levels in tuna packed in oil compared to water. Draining contents had no effect on mercury levels, and the fluid, both oil and water, contained little mercury. These data indicate that people who eat canned tuna frequently can choose light tuna and reduce their mercury intake. Canned mackerel had much lower levels of mercury than tuna.

    PMID: 15364590 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

     


    (Edited by Ed Thompson on 1/10, 7:30pm)


    Post 19

    Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 5:19amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Nice to know, since I buy the cheapest cans of tuna around ;-)
    [most value in nutrition for the money]


    Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


    User ID Password or create a free account.