Dr. Mercola Interviews the Experts
This article is part of a weekly series in which Dr. Mercola interrogations many experts on a variety of health matters. To accompany more expert interrogations, click here.
Dr. Robert Lustig, a pediatric endocrinologist and Professor Emeritus at the University of California, San Francisco, has written a number of excellent records about state. His latest, “Metabolical: The Lure and the Lies of Processed Food, Nutrition, and Modern Medicine” croaks depth into the details of how changes in our food supply have injured our metabolic state.( The caused term “metabolical” is actually a portmanteau of the words “metabolic” and “diabolical.”)
“I wrote it because nothing else has worked, ” Lustig says. “Part of the question is this is such a complicated issue. There are too many stakeholders and you have to find a technique for stimulating everyone joyful. Until you do, you can’t solve it.
There is a way to actually solve this,[ but] every stakeholder, whether it be the patient, medical doctors, the menu corporation, insurance policies manufacture, the medical professing, Wall street and Congress … has to understand the same thing. They all have to be working off the same set of happenings. You look what happens when you don’t work off the same set of details.
So, my job was to framed all of this in one volume so that everyone had access to the same intelligence, and then we can go from there. I lay out in the book what the polemic for determine the entire food system is, and how everyone can benefit from it, even the meat industry.”
The Two Primary Keys
In summary, it boils down to two primary key issues or troubles. The first is that the medical constitution doesn’t want you to know that medications were never intended or designed to treat the foundational cause of chronic disease. They purely give the symptoms.
“In the book, I make it very clear that modern drug has two strifes, two paradigms, ” Lustig says. “One is medicine of acute disease, and for the most part, they’ve gotten it reasonably right. I was part of that method for 40 times and was comfortable within it.
But for chronic disease, Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, lipid problems, coronary thrombosis, cancer, dementia , nonalcoholic fatty liver cancer, polycystic ovarian canker — all of who the hell is chronic metabolic ailments, all of who the hell is mitochondrial ailments — we don’t have anything. We have symptomatic succour merely.
So, we have LDL lowering agents — and if LDL were the problem, that would be fine — except LDL is NOT the problem. LDL is a symptom of the question. It is a manifestation of the metabolic dysfunction. Same thing with hyperglycemia.
Same thing with hypertension. Same thing with osteoporosis. Same thing with autoimmune illnes. All of these, “were having” symptomatic cares. We don’t cure or reverse the disease; we just treat the symptoms. And so the ailment gets worse.
The way I describe it in the book is, it’s like generating an aspirin to a patient with a psyche tumor because they have a headache. It might work today, but it’s not going to solve the problem. And that’s what modern medicine is throwing at people with chronic disease, and it is, of course, bursting the bank.”
The other trouble is that the nutrient industry doesn’t want you to know that almost all meat are intrinsically are you all right until they’re handled, and processed foods make up a majority of the nutrients parties chew.
Food is remedy, but processed food is lethal, and there’s no drug that can undo the damage of processed food.~ Dr. Robert Lustig
As noted by Lustig 😛 TAGEND
“The point I shape in the book is that just since they are call it processed food, doesn’t make it food. Calling it a processed food suggests that it is a subset of nutrient. Michael Pollan[ calls it] agreeable food-like substances. The information of its consideration of this matter is, processed food is poison. Food is prescription, but processed food is poison, and there’s no drug that they are able untie the damage of processed food.”
Indeed, formerly you are familiar with the molecular pathways, when you are familiar with the transcription causes and the actual mechanisms of action of various diseases, and the various drugs used to treat them, you can easily see that they do not treat the underlying problem. And that’s why people don’t get well.
“What I’m trying to do in this book is to separate food from processed food and explaining that processed food is the problem, and the authorities concerned will not solve the health care crisis or the environmental crisis until we solve processed food, ” Lustig says.
The History of Medicine
In his volume, Lustig does an excellent job of presenting the history of our meat and medical methods, and the various influences that contributed us down the path to where we are today. For example, a significant part of why medical doctors are so clueless about health today is because Big Pharma was placed in charge of educational opportunities. The pharmaceutical manufacture, in turn, was a distinct profit-making programme from its inception.
In 1910, Abraham Flexner, an instructor, wrote the Flexner Report, which turned out to be a turning point in areas of creating evidence-based modern remedy, while simultaneously eliminating countless health-related factors, including nutrition and preventive medicine. His brother, Simon Flexner, a pathologist and pharmacist, was the first president of Rockefeller University.
One of the reasons the Flexner Report eliminated certain aspects of medicine was because John D. Rockefeller, chairwoman of Standard Oil, was also in the pharmaceutical business. He was trying to sell coal tar, a byproduct of oil refining, as a medication for a range of ailments.
So, Rockefeller was seeking brand-new benefit streets. “He basically said we have to get medications and especially coal tar into the sides of specialists who can prescribe it, ” Lustig says. The only way to do that was by overhauling the medical method and changing the focus to drugs.
“So that was the start of Big Pharma. That’s not the storey they want to tell, but that is in fact the instance, ” Lustig says. “Same thing with dentistry. Weston Price, perhaps the most famous of all dentists, knew this back in the 1920 s and ‘3 0s and actually said that sugar was the primary operator of chronic oral infection, whether it be periodontitis or dental caries.
Everything was going in that direction until 1945 with the advent of fluoride, and then immediately everything Weston Price had developed up to that extent get deep-sixed. In happening, the dentists even said that if we got rid of dental caries, how are we going to make money? So, his undertaking was basically forgotten.
The same thing in dietetics. It turns out that Lenna Cooper, co-founder of the American Dietetic Association, back in 1917, was the apprentice of John Harvey Kellogg. She didn’t even have a dietary magnitude … Kellogg was very much against flesh. He was a Seventh-Day Adventist, and it turned out that the American Dietetic Association is in favour of the entire Seventh-Day Adventist religious paradigm.
To this day, we still see it in terms of vegan nutritions. So, people talk about vegan diets being appropriate for health, and they are able to, but they are not by any means exclusive. They too talk about it being important for environmental health to try to reduce the methane from the moo-cows.
It turns out the kine didn’t spew methane until we started giving them antibiotics, because we killed off the good bacteria in their intestines and now they have quadruple the amount of methane compared to what they did in 1968 before the animal antibiotic craze got started. So, it’s not the kine, it’s what we do to the cows. All food is inherently good. It’s what we do to the menu that’s not, and that’s what I show in the book.”
The adulteration of our menu can actually be traced back to around 1850. In Great Britain, the industrial coup was a turning point where two things happened at the same time.
One, beings in sweatshops succeeded long epoches and didn’t have time to cook proper dinners, so they terminated up devouring managed cookies laden with carbohydrate, which had become available from other British colonies like Barbados. This undernourished them in terms of antioxidants, fatty acids and other important nutrients. The second big-hearted dietary alter was canning, which exposed beings to lead poisoning as the cans were made of lead.
Why You Shouldn’t Focus on Food Labels
By now, you’ve probably learnt yourself diligently to read food names. The problem is that the label will not tell you what’s been done to the food. “This is one of the reasons why nobody’s getting better because there’s nothing to learn from the label that will actually help you, ” Lustig says. Harmonizing to Lustig, a food is healthy if it fulfils two criteria 😛 TAGEND
It protects your liver
It feeds your nerve
A food that does neither is deadly, and any nutrient that does exclusively one or the other, but not both, is somewhere in the middle. Real food, because it has fiber, protects your liver and nourishes your nerve. Treated nutrient is fiberless, and the reason for this is because fiber increases shelf life. By removing the fiber from the menu, it thwarts it from extending rancid, but it also induces it inherently unhealthy.
Essentially, “in an attempt to try to increase accessibility, reduction wastage, we turned our entire food supply on its head in order to create stocks preferably than clear menu available, ” Lustig says.
Then, in the 1970 s, Richard Nixon told the U.S. agriculture secretary, Earl Butts, to come up with a plan to lessen food rates, as fluctuate nutrient costs were generating political dissension. The reaction was the start of monoculture and chemical-driven farming.
“Now, we have nitrogen runoff demolish our environment and antibiotics in the feed in order to keep the animals alive, but mostly killing off their own bacteria and ours, and likewise starting chronic disease and destroying the environment as well.
It’s basically were integrated into our Western food system. And we’re not going to solve health care, we’re not going to solve chronic disease, we’re not going to solve the economics[ or] the environmental problems until we are aware of what the problem is, ” Lustig says.
Refinement Constitutes Everything Worse
While Lustig argues that the elaboration of carbohydrates is the primary culprit that builds processed food so bad for your state, I trust treated fattens may be an even bigger give.
Omega-6 linoleic acid( LA ), including, is a damaging metabolic poison. In 1850, the LA in the average diet was about 2% of total calories. Today, it’s between 20% and 30%. While we do need some omega-6, since your torso is not make it, the point is we need nowhere near the amount we’re now getting.
“I agree that omega-6s constitute a problem, ” Lustig says. “No. 1, they’re proinflammatory by themselves and No. 2, they have enough unsaturated double bails so that if you heat them high enough, you fling them and end up drawing trans flabs. That’s the problem of all of these polyunsaturated flabs. They’re not meant to be heated beyond their smoking station, and we do.”
In addition to those issues, polyunsaturated overweights such as LA are highly susceptible to oxidation, and as the solid oxidizes, it breaks down into harmful sub-components such as boosted lipid oxidation end products( ALES) and oxidized LA metabolites( OXLAMS ). These ALES and OXLAMS also cause damage.
One type of advanced lipid oxidation end product( ALE) is 4HNE, a mutagen known to induce DNA damage. Studies have shown there’s a definite correlation between elevated levels of 4HNE and coronary failure. LA breaks down into 4HNE even faster when the petroleum is heated, which is why cardiologists recommend forestalling fried nutrients. LA intake and the subsequent ALES and OXLAMS raised too play a significant persona in cancer.
HNE and other ALES are singularly damaging even in mighty small quantities. While excess sugar is certainly bad for your health and should commonly should be restricted to 25 grams a day or less, I imagine LA is far more damaging overall. As justified by Lustig 😛 TAGEND
“We have a metabolic headache of reactive oxygen categories( ROS) that are doing damage if you can’t quench them. That’s why we have antioxidants in our body — glutathione, vitamin E –[ they’re] basically the subside for those working reactive oxygen categories. The fact of the matter is our mitochondria are drawing ROS every single time of every single day.
It is a regular byproduct of metabolism. The station is we’re supposed to be able to quench them. You can only quench them if you get the antioxidants into you.
The problem is as soon as you’ve made the germ out of the speck seed, you’ve mostly abbreviated your antioxidant intake by tenfold. So, we are antioxidant deficient because of food processing, which then leaves us vulnerable to the destructions of ROS from multiple sources including our own mitochondria.”
Real Food Is the Answer
The key, then, is to eat whole food, which is naturally rich in fiber and low-toned in carbohydrate. On a area observe, free radicals are not all bad. They’re also biological signaling molecules, and if you indiscriminately suppress them, which is the danger you run into when using very high sums of antioxidant augments, it can backfire.
The best nature is to get your antioxidants from your meat, and real meat is not merely requires antioxidants, but too doesn’t make excess ROS, so you get help from both objectives, as it were. As for the type of diet you choose, any nutrition can work, specified it’s right for your metabolism. The only diet that does not work for anyone is a handled menu nutrition.
Now that you know the root difficulties, what solutions does Lustig advocate? For starters, education alone is not enough, he says. We need education plus implementation. And that requires a different societal response.
“The way I describe it is that there’s personal intervention, which for the lack of a better word we can call rehab, and societal intervention, which for lack of a better command we can call laws. Rehab and statutes for everything that is a hedonic essence — it is necessary to both.”
The first step of personal intervention is figuring out if you’re sick. “And don’t ask your doctor because they don’t know how it works to figure it out, ” Lustig says. In Chapter 9 of his notebook, he schedules clues that allows you to self-diagnose.
In words of taking into consideration your health problems, your primary “treatment” will be to conclude, possibly substantial, changes to how you shop and ingest. As a general, easy-to-follow rule, if it has a label, don’t buy it. Real food is not have part descriptions. Lustig’s book also includes guidance on how to read food labels in cases where you might not have an option.
“We too need societal involvement. The trouble is the food industry doesn’t want any societal involvement because this is their gravy train. So, the question is, how do you do this?
Normally we are to be able do it through legislation, but the nutrient manufacture has totally co-opted the part legislative sprig; 338 out of 535 congressmen take money from the American Legislative Exchange Council( ALEC ), and agriculture is their fourth[ largest] give after petroleum, tobacco and pharma.”
Barring legislative success, we’re left with litigation. Already, there are a number of lawsuits in the works, various of which Lustig is a part of. Ultimately, we must restructure the part food items so that all stakeholders benefit. “And we have to demonstrate to them how they can benefit, ” Lustig says.
Subsidies Are the Biggest Hindrance to Change
Can the meat manufacture make money selling real menu? Lustig concludes the answer is yes, and in his bible, he details how real menu obliges both financial and ecological sense. The key is to remove aids, which currently grease the wheels of the processed food industry.
“The gives are the single biggest blockade, ” Lustig says. “They’re the single biggest obstacle to being able to fix the food supply because that’s what’s reaching processed food cheap. The Giannini Foundation at UC Berkeley did a back of envelope calculation several years ago.
What would the price of food look like if we got rid of all nutrient gives? It turns out that the price of food would not change. People “re saying it” would go up. No, it wouldn’t. It would not change except for two components. Two pieces would go up: Sugar and corn[ used for high-fructose corn syrup ]. So, basically, that would reduce consumption of the primary viru in our nutrition that’s cause the most hassle …
The food industry … can originate more fund doing the right thing stipulated we get rid of the aids or realize the aids for real food so that they can make money selling the right thing. This compels government. There’s no way around it. That’s why this work is complete. It’s laid out for all the stakeholders, including authority, as to what has to happen and why.
I wrote this diary for everyone to understand the same principles all at once, so that we can actually have an argument and a debate and hopefully come to the table about the facts, because until we do that, “theres been” no solving this question. If everyone comes to the table, honestly, and declares to what the issue is, what their own problems is, we are able to, in fact, solve it.”
To learn more, is secure to pick up a transcript of Lustig’s book, “Metabolical: The Lure and the Lies of Processed Food, Nutrition, and Modern Medicine.” You are also welcome to find a prosperity of information on his website, RobertLustig.com, including media illusions, audio recordings, video lecturings, books, sections and upcoming episodes where you can hear him speak.
Read more: articles.mercola.com