Hi gymee,

Being an athlete, I thought you might find this article about coconut oil interesting (especially the information about medium chain fatty acids being burned like carbohydrates for energy).

In my opinion, coconut oil along with olive oil are the two highest priority fats to include in my diet (I supplement with fish oil, too). Coconut oil has been demonized for years by the soybean industry (I wonder if they had any ulterior motives?) and is one of the most misunderstood fats. It's not surprising that you feel it's unhealthy. I know I avoided coconut oil like the plague until I learned more about it.

Coconut oil is loaded with health benefits. It contains high amounts of lauric acid which is antiviral, being used effectively in HIV/AIDS patients to lower viral load, it's also improves thyroid function. Coconut oil is a medium chain triglyceride which provides fewer calories than other types of fats and allows dieters to decrease their caloric intake without sacrificing taste. Best of all, it's a thermogenic and actually speeds weight loss (of great interest to many people on this forum).

Take a second look, you might be surprised.

Dig

hi dig,

i am afraid that most people just do not understand fats. hopefully this dissertation may prove helpful. the reason why the 2 essential fats are essential, is not because they are polyunsaturated. there are many polyunsaturated fats that are not helpful to the body, including all the trans-fats created by partial hydrogenation.

our bodies just did not evolve, to manufacture any enzymes that can place double bonds between the 3rd and 4th carbon atoms in a fat molecule, nor can we place a double bond between the 6th and 7th carbon atoms (creating omega 3 and omega 6 fats). we do however have the ability to make a double bond between the 9th and 10th carbon atoms (omega 9 or oleic acid, which is the main oil in olive oil.

olive oil is monounsaturated, while coconut oil is completely saturated, so they are quite different. however, all fats can be easily made by the body, with the exception of our 2 omegas, which is also the metabolic pathway for many of our prostaglandins. the essential fats are extremely reactive, which is both good and bad. they can be easily destroyed, even in our bodies, without anti-oxidants. but they also play extremely important roles in our bodies, by harnessing light and oxygen energy.

the body can not make glucose from fat, so if we do not get enough sugar in our diet, our body needs to break down our much-needed protein, to make enough sugar for us, to run our brains, and supply us with some energy, along with some fats. dietary fat will always stay as fat. some of it is used anabolically, to help keep the essential fats from reacting with each other. the rest is stored as energy reserves, or burned as fuel.

when sugar is broken down, it forms 2-carbon acetate fragments. these can either be burned for energy, or created as fat. these fragments are simply added together, making c2, c4, c6, c8, c10, c12, c14, c16(palmitic), or c18(stearic). the body will make whatever it needs. it can take c18, and place a double bond in the 9th position, creating omega 9 (i.e. oleic acid from olive oil).

as you know, my fat intake comes exclusively from safflower oil and flax meal. from sources i have read, and that you guys have substantiated, most of the saturated fat contained in these products is palmitic. when i look at my latest blood test from 5 years ago, my palmitic stands at 145, reference range between 85-150. my stearic acid stands at 75, reference between 50-80. so as you can see, i am at the high end of each scale, but very balanced between the two. while my intake of stearic is close to nil, my body still managed to have very balanced amounts, showing that it is very easy to make stearic from palmitic. actually, that whole chain is easily transgressed in both ways. if you eat lots of stearic, the body will make whatever palmitic it needs. the body is not supposed to have any real levels of c10(capric), c12(lauric), or c14(myristic), as these fats are either built up to the 2 important long-chain fats, or as you stated, burned for energy.

the main point, is that these fats are easily created from any sort of excess calories. i have no problem with some saturated fat in our diet, for if we had none, the body would still make what it needs. the same is true with cholesterol. it is an absolute need for our cells. my fear for you guys, is simply the AMOUNT that you eat. saturated fat is very sticky, and is very prone to creating larger globules. cholesterol is a 27-chain carbon fatty acid, so it is all that much stickier. the good carbs that i eat have tons of phytos that fat-foods just don't have. this constant supply of sugar helps to keep my glycogen in my muscles supplied, as well as my liver, for my bloodstream and brain. our bodies just can't store great amounts of sugar, so we need to eat it every day (but appropriate amounts from appropriate foods, along with all the phytos).

the medium chain fats have been around in the health buzz for years, but for the most part, is just part of the advertisers desire to sell their product, in this case coconut oil. again, the body can go up and down the scale from c2 to c18, easily. if capric or lauric acid is digested, the body will decide what to do with it (catabolize for energy, or build up towards palmitic or stearic for anabolism/fat storage), based upon the body's need at the time. fats can be made from excess sugar, but not the reverse. so if one is not sugar-impaired, err on the side of too much sugar, rather than too much fat.

>>"the good carbs that i eat have tons of phytos that fat-foods just don't have."

Why are you still under the impression that we DON'T eat good carbs loaded with phytos? We just choose ones with little to no sugar or starch.

>>"my fear for you guys, is simply the AMOUNT that you eat."

I'm not clear on what your point was here: are you referring to saturated fat's reputation as being "artery clogging?" Study of the fat in artery clogs states that more than half is polyunsaturated. Only about 26% is saturated. (Felton, C V, et al, Lancet, 1994, 344:1195)

>>"if we do not get enough sugar in our diet, our body needs to break down our much-needed protein"

Correct only when someone consumes insufficient amounts of protein. Most LCers consume ample amounts.

Sorry, but the conclusion I draw is still "eat sufficient protein, fat, and minimally-impacting carbs."

You know, I don't think Gymeet has ever actually read Dr. Atkins' book. The amounts, what they are and how they relate to your health are in there. Granted, I think the layout of the book makes it hard to find some of the factual information, but it is there. And the recommened foods, and portions are easy to find.

Not only that, but post mortem studies of people from cultures both high and low in saturated fat (the study I'm thinking of compared both Japanese and American soldiers during WW2) have demonstrated roughly equivalent amounts of arterial plaque which strongly suggests that it's not the amount or even the type of fat that a person eats that contributes to arterial plaques. Other studies have confirmed those observations.

there are many articles/studies that do support the fat/plaque argument. the only question i have is what sort of polyunsaturated fat is this ? i highly doubt that is of the omega 3 or omega 6 variety. the trans fats are sticky, like the saturated fats.

and yes, kristine, that is what i was worried about - too much sticky saturated fat clogging up the system.

Yup...studies that show a fat/plaque link abound, but if you actually read them you'll find that that link is a weak one indeed AND that all of the studies also included diets that were high in carbs, specifially high GI ones.


http://www.mercola.com/2002/feb/23/...sm_myths_06.htm

You might want to read some of the referenced studies and articles cited in this. Interesting reading.

Quote from the above website:

"High-carbohydrate/low-fat diets (which is what vegetarian diets are) can also place one at a greater risk for heart disease, diabetes, and cancer due to their hyperinsulemic effects on the body"

Perhaps my explanation on Cholesterol synthesis could reveal why hyperinsulemic effects may cause this:

Cholesterol Synthesis:

anything italisiced is an enzyme

Acetyl CoA (2C which means it has 2 Carbons)
..|
..|
.\'/
Acetoacetyl CoA (4C)
..|
..| HMG-CoA Synthase
..|.(cytoplasm)
..|
.\'/
HMG-CoA (6C)
..|
..|HMG-CoA Reductase <----Gene Repressed by Cholesterol
..|........(ER).....<---- INSULIN (Positive activator of enzyme)
..|...................<---- Statin Drugs (Inhibitor of enzyme)
..|...................<---- This enzyme is the rate limiting step
.\'/
Mevalonate (6C)
..|
..|
.\'/
.\'/.............<---- Note here there has been two steps.
Farneysl PPi (15C)
..|
..|
..|
..|
.\'/
Squalene (30C)
..|
..|
.\'/
Lanosterol (30C)
..|
..|
..| NADPH
..|
..|
.\'/
Cholesterol (27C)

Cholesterol Products include:

1. Steroids (Adrenal, Ovaries, Testes)
2. Bile Acids (Liver)
3. Vitamin D
4. Cell Membranes

Obviously, some cholesterol is good for you...

However if you look at HMG-CoA Reductase and its positive activator Insulin... Some people speculate that a high amount of Insulin could cause Cholesterol deposits. That is why, some speculate, that low fat, high carb diets could cause Atherosclerosis, etc...

High insulin also drive fatty acid synthesis, triglyceride synthesis as well (citrate being a positive enhancer,) which I already have discussed.

I understand it now...

hi lisa,
most of these studies pit a "low-fat/high carb" diet against the "low-carb/high fat"diet". they consistently equate a vegetarian diet as one with low fat and high carbs. all a vegetarian diet is one without animal flesh. they do not compare them with the best diet of all (AMPLE PROTEIN, AMPLE ESSENTIAL FAT, REMAINDER NATURAL CARBS).

i think you are seeing only what you want to see, and ignoring that fats cause artery clogging. the stickier the fat, the more apt to clog. the 2 essential fats are not sticky - just the opposite, while the trans-polyunsaturates are almost as sticky as the saturated fats, because of their chemical make-up.

another site that does a lot to debunk the saturated fat/heart disease/cholesterol myth: www.thincs.org

These are all credible well-published scientists who are experts in their chosen field. If you think that you know more than they do, please feel free to pose your arguments to them.

Hey Mr. Apple and Mrs. Pear,
It has been lonely for me, since they separated us. I also miss your kids. They are such SWEET children. Say hello to Berry, Nana, Peachie, Datie, and Grapie.

Say, have you heard the latest ? They are mixing me with water, and then feeding us to rats, trying to assess whether 10 gallons of us cause the rats to age faster.

Would Laurel be the same without Hardy ? Would Abbott be the same without Costello ? Would Romeo be the same without Juliet ? Tea without Sympathy ? Brave without Daring ? Sand without Sea ? Hugs without Kisses ? Why is it that low-carbers think that I would be the same without you ?

I long for the day when we can be back together, once again sharing our affections with one another, and providing people with an excellent source of nutrition, and some get-up-and-go for those that now can only get up.

Until Then,
Sincerely Yours,
Sugar

Well I think Gymeejet basically trying to say is be sensible when eating and I think that was Lifetime maintanence is on Atkins where carbs can be over 100g/day...

I think the confusion is the means to a end. Both positions make sense, if you think about.

Korry

And what I understand from gymeejet is ample carbs..

I have no problem with that... ample carbs to me would mean enough carbs that I can burn in a day... hence my daily intake of carbs would be a concern of mine...

JMHO,
Korry

Well, it sounds like we are all following gymee's diet, except for gymee. "ample protien" ie real natural protein from a variety of sources, not a manmade creation of the last few years which may or may not have all our bodies need, why be a guinea pig for frankenfood, "ample fats" including not just the ones he insists on calling "essential' but all of them the various omegas, the beneficial saturated ones as well, and "ample" carbohydrates, all we can use without causing insulin spikes and raised blood sugars. Bill

by gosh kory,
i think thou dost hit the nail on the head. AMPLE = gymee's definition of getting enough of each nutrient. allowing sugar to do its job of energizing the brain, and the muscles to some extent. not breaking down protein for sugar, and creating ammonia in the body. as well as causing amino imbalances, since only some of them can be turned into glucose. protein is for building blocks. so are the essential fats. use these nutrients in the way they were designed to be used. sugar is a friend, but like all friends, it must be treated respectfully, if you want to keep it as a friend. we need to understand what each nutrient does in the body, so that we know how to nourish the body fully and correctly. the more saturated the fat, the stickier it is, and the quicker it can quagmire together. the essential fats, plus omega9, do not form large masses, because of their shape and electrical properties.

we should all be taking these extensive tests, so that we can get a bird's eye view of our individual bodies, what we may be lacking in, what we have in too much abundance.