inflammation, omega-6 oils, and nuts
No, Irene; nuts have always contained inflammatory oils, and
whether the nut or the nut butter is fresh or not has nothing to
do with this inflammatory factor.
Floyd Chilton’s book Inflammation Nation quantifies the
inflammatory nature of many foods, especially those containing
oils, with a calculated numeric inflammatory index. Chilton
doesn’t discuss the antioxidant potential, or conversely,
rancidity and oxidation, of natural foods because it’s entirely
unrelated to the direct inflammatory messengers contributed by
dietary oils.
You can add oils to the worksheet if you know the exact component
fatty acids and see what its index is. If anyone does that, I’d
appreciate a copy please; you’d be surprised at how high hemp oil
is.
I think not realising there is a difference between free radical
damage potential and inflammatory potential due to cytokines
persuades too many people that a some excess omega-6 intake is
OK. Since reading the book and becoming aware of the difference,
I withdrew the nuts and my own inflammation subsided. To think
this improvement was still available to me after being a
succesful wholistic consultant for almost eight years speaks
volumes; we’re all still learning thanks to writers like Chilton.
So, my warning applies to mixed nuts; and as nut butters are only
ground nuts, there’s no difference in what they do.
Irene, walnuts are 38% linoleic acid, an inflammatory omega-6
fatty acid; I don’t have figures for almonds handy. A tiny amount
of nut butter like I said, with a normal healthy diet, provides
adequate omega-6. Take more and you’ll reliably get inflammation
that you can’t just balance by taking extra wild fish oil;
inflammatory cytokines are not neutralised by doing that.
So be careful with those omega-6 oils; they’re practically
everywhere, and every drop adds into your inflammatory index.
March 2nd, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Duncan Crow wrote:
> No, Irene; nuts have always contained inflammatory oils,
according to what research?
You mention a book by Chilton - when was it written and what does it
reference? Is there anywhere I can verify original research?
I ask because what you say appears to contradict recent research as well
as experience. Dr Nicholas Perricone MD, PhD, researcher, for example
explains the contrary in his books.
and
> whether the nut or the nut butter is fresh or not has nothing to
> do with this inflammatory factor.
Is it a blood-type factor? I am aware that some nuts are inflammatory to
specific blood types - for example type O gets inflammation from
peanuts. But walnuts work well for type O as anti-inflammatory.
Does the research behind Chilton differentiate WHO gets inflammatoery
versus anti-inflammatory effect - or does he at least present the
*chemistry* involved at the molecular level?
> There is a separate calulation for the lipid
> peroxidation index for food oils,
That is a separate issue and deals with the effect of oxygen (such as
from the air) on oils before you eat them. It’s not an issue if you
store them correctly.
> I think not realising there is a difference between free radical
> damage potential and inflammatory potential due to cytokines
What cytokines?
Cytokines are components of the immune system which arrange for what
white cells will be produced, and whether they will initiate immune
system action from the bone marrow (as in antibody produiction) or from
the thymus (as in macrophage production).
In what way are you suggesting a connection between any cytokine and
any oil????
Short of an allergic response I see none?
> persuades too many people that a some excess omega-6 intake is
> OK.
Excess omega 6 is not okay but why do you suggest a cytokine connection?
And why do you suggest a few nuts in the diet makes an omega-6 excess?
Omega-6 is essential - it’s not a baddie!
IF you avoid vegetable oils other than extra virgin olive and you eat a
modicum of nuts for your blood type, you will get a fine ratio and an
anti-inflammatory result:-)
This has to do with inflammation at cell level - NOT the kind that gets
the immune system all riled up for foreign invader action:-))
< Since reading the book and becoming aware of the difference,
> I withdrew the nuts and my own inflammation subsided.
Which nuts? Are you type O and withdrew peanuts or peanutbutter or type
a and stopped peanutbutter made from roasted nuts? If so your CELL level
inflamamtion would subsuide, not cytokline changes.
Writing does not make it correct - research is needed behind the writing
- and a date of writing - to make it a valid thing to consider. Then we
can either confirm it properly or reject it for good reasons.
> So, my warning applies to mixed nuts; and as nut butters are only
> ground nuts, there’s no difference in what they do.
There is. Depends on oxidation factors, blood antigen factors,
freshness, storage, etc. Ground nuts have no protective coating to keep
oxygen out. There’s no comparison between peanutbutter that’s been on
the counter for weeks, made from roasted nuts - and fresh nuts unroasted
and matching blood type. One will wreck health, the other will build it.
> Irene, walnuts are 38% linoleic acid, an inflammatory omega-6
> fatty acid;
Walnuts have the following food composition for a 1/4 cup of walnuts per
the USDA food database:
0.955g saturated fat
4.254g monounsaturated fat
9.944 polyunsaturated fat
It also has 29mg of beta-sitasterol (works like roto rooter for the
blood vessels, also lowers LDL and riases HDL) and provides some
carotene, lutein and zeaxanthin anti-odidants.
The calories for this reasonable serving size are 175 and it includes 7g
or protein, some manganese, potassium and selenium which we all need,
and more pantothenic acid (anti-stress) than most foods for the small
volume.
The inflamamtory aspect from the linoleic we need anyway, is more than
offset by the anti-inflammatory other components for a net gain and to
supply some accompanying necessary nutrients.
Where would you rather get the essential omega-6 you need, and why?
> I don’t have figures for almonds handy.
They are higher in saturated fat and in monounsaturated fat - and a lot
lower in minerals and vitamins, with no antioxidants extras to speak of
(unless you count 1 microgram of carotene).
So they are good in terms of monounsaturated fat - but they "lose on the
swings what they gain on the roundabout", if you now that saying.
You have to look at each item as a total food option.
BOTH are good - but for different reasons and there is no point making a
fuss about their relatively less-fantastic points and ignoring the great
ones - or vice versa.
An assumption that does not hold true. With walnuts you get more omega-6
than almonds for example, and yes that includes an inflamamtory aspect
in the eicosanoids produced - but you ALSO get the nutrients to
un-inflame the inflammatory aspects, - the pantothenic, manganese,
selenium, potassium, carotene,lutein and zeaxanthin. Almonds are less
omega-6 and none of the extras come with them.
Overall the walnuts are better nutrition despite the higher omega-6!
And D’ADamo’s research proves it.
> inflammatory cytokines are not neutralised by doing that.
You have your immune system cytokines and your cell level inflammation
involving phospholipids and eicosanoids a bit confused I think?
> So be careful with those omega-6 oils; they’re practically
> everywhere, and every drop adds into your inflammatory index.
They are NOT "practically everywhere". They are in plant fats in varying
amounts - mostly in plant oils, nuts, and seeds. Oils other than extra
virgin olive oil are good to avoid in general - but the rest of the
plant items such as avocado, olives, nuts and seeds, come with balancing
nutrients.
Namaste,
IRene
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Hi Duncan , I wonder how the raw foodests feel about
this , since a lot of their recipes depend on nuts ?
I’m surprised that Gabriel Cousens doesn’t discuss it
at least ,
Liz Nelson
March 4th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
Also Duncan ,
do you think there could be a connection between food
allergies/ or toxins as in toxins from nuts like
afflatoxin in peanuts and diabetes type 1 . If cows
milk can create an auto- immune response in the
pancreas , is it possible for peanut butter to do the
same for e.g. ?
Liz Nelson
March 5th, 2007 at 12:34 am
Yes, but allergic reactions are not only a product of toxins such as
aflatoxins, they are also a product of a growing burden of toxins
generally, which eventually can overbalance the system into showing
symptoms.
Although excess omega-6 oils contribute in a major way to
inflammation, and this involves the immune and allergic respnses, the
biggest source of toxin burden in my view is probably the condition of
your bowel ecology. This goes on in a high-volume 24/7 scenario. I
have about a week’s worth of reading on the subject on my website.
Repeated exposure to any toxin can eventually cause a bona-fide
allergic reaction. Nevertheless, serious, potentially fatal auto-
immune disorders can be stopped and reversed. Been there done that,
and I have a protocol for it on my website.
March 5th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Yes, but allergic reactions are not only a product of toxins such as
aflatoxins, they are also a product of a growing burden of toxins
generally, which eventually can overbalance the system into showing
symptoms.
Although excess omega-6 oils contribute in a major way to
inflammation, and this involves the immune and allergic respnses, the
biggest source of toxin burden in my view is probably the condition of
your bowel ecology. This goes on in a high-volume 24/7 scenario. I
have about a week’s worth of reading on the subject on my website.
Repeated exposure to any toxin can eventually cause a bona-fide
allergic reaction. Nevertheless, serious, potentially fatal auto-
immune disorders can be stopped and reversed. Been there done that,
and I have a protocol for it on my website.
March 5th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Liz, the raw foodists will find this new knowledge will change their
concepts about nuts and refine their approach. Even more so when they
learn that the so-called "essential" omega-3 from plants is not
essential if EPA and DHA is present in the diet. In fact this omega-3
has no known function in the body except for a tiny 1%-4% conversion
to useful EPA and DHA, and it adds to a potential omega-6 burden that
they probably have already. So, flax oil any time is largely non-
beneficial, and in some circumstances can be detrimental.
Floyd Chilton’s book Inflammation Nation provides a new perspective
under one cover, something like an executive summary of a large branch
of food science. It stresses that any omega-6 intake beyond the
requirement for the day is inflammatory, and that inflammation is
additive with other factors that promote inflammatory archidonic acid
formation, and can be further reduced by factors that block AA
formation.
I don’t have the figures for most nuts but inflammatory factors of
nuts, and a separate mechanism, their lipid peroxidation index, can be
deduced by knowing what the component fatty acids are. 100 grams of
peanuts rates an inflammatory index of 40 out of 100 allowable for the
day, so a cup of peanuts is your food for the day unless you want
maintain inflammation. And peanuts has one of the lowest inflammatory
indexes of the "nuts" due to its unsaturate and monounsaturate content
and low omega-6; other nuts such as walnuts contain 38% omega-6 so it
incites inflammation with a much smaller portion.
Again, that’s a daily limit so you don’t want to blow your day with a
couple of ounces of nuts, and you can’t "cover the excess" by adding
EPA and DHA.
A lot of people don’t know the details of oil balance so can’t
consider it in an analysis of their personal sources of inflammation;
that’s why the book is a bestseller. Once you have the inflammatory
index in front of you you can get an exact number out of it to see how
you’re doing. No guesswork is required anymore.
March 6th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
People are generally unaware of the exact amount of inflammation they
can encounter on their chosen diet. Chilton’s book details this
information, and you can quickly ballpark any food you want by
looking at its fatty acid content. It’s kind of a new summary that
pulls together what we know about the inflammatory properties of oils.
Peanuts has about the lowest inflammatory index; the index shows that
just a cupful is all the inflammation you can handle for the day.
Walnuts tops you out much more quickly due to its considerably higher
omega-6 content.
March 6th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Yes, but allergic reactions are not only a product of toxins such as
aflatoxins, they are also a product of a growing burden of toxins
generally, which eventually can overbalance the system into showing
symptoms.
Although excess omega-6 oils contribute in a major way to
inflammation, and this involves the immune and allergic respnses, the
biggest source of toxin burden in my view is probably the condition of
your bowel ecology. This goes on in a high-volume 24/7 scenario. I
have about a week’s worth of reading on the subject on my website.
Repeated exposure to any toxin can eventually cause a bona-fide
allergic reaction. Nevertheless, serious, potentially fatal auto-
immune disorders can be stopped and reversed. Been there done that,
and I have a protocol for it on my website.
March 7th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
People are generally unaware of the exact amount of inflammation they
can encounter on their chosen diet. Chilton’s book details this
information, and you can quickly ballpark any food you want by
looking at its fatty acid content. It’s kind of a new summary that
pulls together what we know about the inflammatory properties of oils.
Peanuts has about the lowest inflammatory index; the index shows that
just a cupful is all the inflammation you can handle for the day.
Walnuts tops you out much more quickly due to its considerably higher
omega-6 content.
March 7th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Gabriel Cousens In Conscious Eating , second edition
(2000) does compare and contrast flax seed with fish
oil. His science may be out of date , but he does
think at least at the time of publishing , that flax
seed is better than High EPA fish oil .
-Ground Flax seed may be preferable to the Oil -
something is always lost in the processing , even
"cold pressing" . Sally Fallon also says that flax
seed oil may even have a toxic quality from the
processing , and also she says to use Golden Flax
seeds and not the brown ones . I have forgotten why .
Cousens says that raw foodists having health problems
with the raw diet, corrected with the addition of
flaxseed in their diets . The fiber too is helpful -
another advantage over oil.
What do you think of the Lake Klamath Blue Green
Algae (E3 Live) product . Cousens says this has the
only land based source of complete EPA and Dha?
Anyway as the continually researching mother of
three teens (actually 14 - 20 years), with one
diagnosed recently with type 1 - she’s a smart but
stubborn 16) , My main problem is getting them to eat
healthier .
My diabetic 16 year old is in a place where she will
not really avail herself of any kind of nutritional
information. She is sick of it all pretty much . And
still isn’t excercising . She went for 2 therapy
sessions with a social worker and quit . I may get her
to a counselor with diabetes/ chronic disease ,
working background based at the local childrens
hospital , but other wise I don’t know whats next. I
am lucky to get some supplementts in her . I would
love to know a good nutritionist with diabetes
clients. I would love my daughter to grab the bull
by the horns and try the raw food thing viz Boutenko
family . For 6 months all I have done is research
foods and alternatives , but it is up to her to latch
onot something and go for health . I need a new out
look on this stage of her situation , since all the
research I do cannot be transmitted to her or motivate
her .The job of mothering in this situation , esp.
given what I know , is too much for me.
Have you any ideas on teenage children ? LIz
March 8th, 2007 at 7:49 am
OK, Gabriel Cousins must be speaking purely as a spin doctor for flax
oil. The science is pretty clear that only tiny amount of the LNA
omega-3 in flax oil is converted to EPA and DHA. This is acutal data
we’re quoting and it will be had to reconcile his view with what
Floyd Chilton, a fatty acids specialist says about it:
"I wish I could tell you that the (ALA) in flaxseed oil could replace
wild fish as a rich source of EPA and DHA but the scientific
literature simply does not support this contention. …We do the
conversion but very slowly, and we also eat a lot of fatty acids such
as LA that ‘compete’ for enzymes that convert ALA to EPA and DHA,
further limiting its conversion."
Other than the toxin bulletins from the government I don’t think
about it much.
March 9th, 2007 at 5:08 am
Irene, I’ve mentioned essential fatty acids expert Floyd H. Chilton’s
book to you before.
Inflammation Nation was published in 2005; it is very methodical and
it contains tons of references. Chilton is a fatty acid expert and
some of the research was done in his own lab; there are 75 references
attributed to Chilton FH in PubMed; you’ll be able to verify the
research mainly there and probably there are industry journal
references too.
It’s important to understand that it’s not a blood-type factor but
direct inflammatory messengers as in leukotrienes and prostaglandins
of the arachidoinic acid reactions that interest Chilton. These
inflammatory factors involve the whole immune response, blood
coagulation, heart attack and stroke risk, and fibrosis of the ogans,
the leading cause of organ failure.
It’s also important to stress that the inflammatory effect is not
type-specific, but extends more or less equally to everyone. The
exception is that some people convert LA to GLA less than others and
that will add to their load.
Chilton presents this exact chemistry on a molecular level, and
reduces it down to numbers that you can add up.
The separate calculation of lipid peroxidation potential of oils
depends on how depleted your antioxidant pool is as much as on how
rancid they are before you eat them. In the warm and highly
oxygenated human body there is potential to oxidize these oils much
faster than they oxidize in a jar on the shelf. Let’s discuss lipid
peroxidation in another thread.
Your question on how it involves cytokines is explained briefly in
this 2002 review, "Omega-3 fatty acids in inflammation and autoimmune
diseases":
<snip>
—————
Coronary heart disease, major depression, aging and cancer are
characterized by an increased level of interleukin 1 (IL-1), a
proinflammatory cytokine. Similarly, arthritis, Crohn’s disease,
ulcerative colitis and lupus erythematosis are autoimmune diseases
characterized by a high level of IL-1 and the proinflammatory
leukotriene LTB(4) produced by omega-6 fatty acids. There have been a
number of clinical trials assessing the benefits of dietary
supplementation with fish oils in several inflammatory and autoimmune
diseases in humans, including rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease,
ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, lupus erythematosus, multiple
sclerosis and migraine headaches.
—————
</snip>
I noted your contention that the inflammation obtained by certain
oils is cellular and does not involve the immune reponse; however we
have data on exactly how that the inflammation involves the immune
response by this mechanism. A PubMed search on (cytokines
inflammation fatty acids) turns up a lot of information along these
lines.
I’m not going to dicker about which nuts and which effect, save to
mention that inflammation is known to be a systemic condition in this
case, not local to cells. Further, your comment about freshness,
storage, oxygen, and food value is valid with regard to oxidation but
it has little to do with this particular reaction.
Hope this helps.
March 9th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
O.K could you elaborate on the toxin bulletins from
the govt. on Blue Green Algae ?
My concerns after reading everything I could find on
Lake Klamath were , how can algae blooms fed by run
off from golfcourses and manure soaked fields from
cow farms up stream , be really "pure " or organic" .
But we tried it anyway , and so far haven’t grown a
third head !
Do you think farm raised spirulina and chlorella are
safer / any better?
By the way do you believe in the advantages of
organic produce,(pesticide free/ more mineral
/vitamin rich etc), and do you grow your own veg at
all? Have you read anything about the health of
peoples like the Hunza tribe of the Himalayas , etc
and the possible connection to the energy of the local
water ? Are there any foods/plants you think have
special healing properties ? Do you think as some do
that if one blesses food , however imperfect it’s
source and value , that it can be consumed safely .
Have you read anything on the Findhorn Community ? THe
Original book came out in the 60s I think . Can’t
remember the title (Findhorn Experiment?) Do you know
the Boutenko story ? Ann Wigmore story etc ? Wheat
grass? What do you think ?Is there something wrong
with everything ?
Since our world is so contaminated , and getting
worse , where will our health come from in the future?
Liz
March 10th, 2007 at 6:41 am
I guess that Barry Sears would support all this work
on inflamation . He has a book out recently on
inflamation ; his cure all is fish oil , molecularly
distilled of course , and he and I thik Andrew Weil
have ultra pure fish oil products for sale on line .
What do you think of Neuromins - Epa /DHA from algae ?
Barry Sears spoke at our school . He said that a
couple of scandanavian countries now give out fish oil
free because of it’s huge disease prevention value .
Back to the old concept of a spoonful of cod liver
oil per day except that now it has to be purified
because of the PCB s and Mercury etc.
March 10th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
I don’t know of neuromins and I don’t support Krill oil. I use Cod-
liver oil because I feel that the mercury and organochlorine
contamination is still inconsequential. Our region is a net producer
of wild salmon oil; that has undetectable to barely detectable
contamination, to my mind nothing more than a kind of background
noise.
Duncan
March 11th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
> Do you think farm raised spirulina and chlorella are
> safer / any better?
I think the chlorella component has to be cacked. As plants have
different attributes to exploit I’d consider a careful blend of
freshwater algae and sea vegetables to be better than the former
alone. I have a page on one component of some sea vegetables called
fucoidans, a close relative to the legendary acemannans of aloe vera,
that algae don’t have. And that’s just one example.
Yes, I believe pesticide-free but not necessarily organic farming has
advantages, and No I don’t grow anything useful but a sacramental
herb called salvia divinorum.
Yes, and some of my clients have been using MegaHydrate off and on,
but I think it’s less about "energy" than ionic properties.
> Are there any foods/plants you think have
> special healing properties ?
Of course; I already mentioned aloe vera and ea vegetables, salvia
divinorum is a pronounced anti-addictive; we’re doing a small trial
on it right now. There’s a big list I can show, although I’m no
herbalist.
No, because it would be a miracle and those don’t happen just for the
asking for millions of people every day.
No.
> Do you know
> the Boutenko story ?
No.
> Ann Wigmore story etc ? Wheat
> grass? What do you think ?
Yes. Good stuff for anyone; juicing in general is too.
> Is there something wrong
> with everything ?
No, finding fault is a human trait; things just are what they are.
We’re probably not going to see health in the future; we’re all gonna
be sick slaves forever if the transnational cartels have their way.
Where it’s going can be summed up by mentioning compulsory
vaccinations, CODEX, NAFTA, depleted uranium, oil spills, backing out
of the Kyoto accord, and illegal government action. And that’s just
the USA, and they’re just getting started.
March 12th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Thanks for this,
Neuromins is the label name of DHA extracted from a
golden micro Algae of the coni species. I suppose it
is a source favored by vegetarians .
In terms of the food chain , algae is probably where
the fish are getting their DHA from ?
Gabrile Cousens, M.D> in Conscious eating;
"Given all the data and the importance of DHa in brain
developement, I do not think we can get enough from
sea vegetables or convert enough of the ALA in
flaxseeds to DHA to maintain an optimal supply for the
developing fetus and the needs of the mother. If as
vegans and vegetarians , and live food people we are
on the minimum side of healthy ,sufficient DHA levels,
why operate without a margin of safety at the risk of
the mental and physical health of our unborn children
, pregnant mothers, young people and adults at every
stage of developement? Without such a margin of safety
, any sort of stress, physical or emotional, could
cause enough of a depletion to drop us into a
pathological zone in terms of DHA levels . For example
this seems to be what happens to some mothers who
never feel at optimal health and energy levels since
their child bearing years began".
March 12th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Duncan you make the most wild statements with no corroboration when asked.
Our design is not nearly so poorly thought out as you make out!
You can eat fish oil to get DHA and EPA in the diet till the cows come
home (and I am all for lots of fish oil supplements) but it will NOT
provide all the functions we need from plant based essential oils such
as those we get from nuts. IT would be nuts to think that:-)
I agree as regards flax - skip it- but nuts are great foods. So are
seeds. They provide not only the right oils ion beneficial ratio but
lots of antioxidants and minerals.
> Floyd Chilton’s book Inflammation Nation
can not be worth a whole lot if he is dissing nuts:-))
Nor do the book reviewers like it. Publisher’s Weekly says:
"It’s not clear that assigning an inflammatory index to a food is useful
to health. Moreover, the world of fatty acids is a complex one, and even
interested readers will find the theory behind the diet isn’t coherent…..
HE claims "The average American diet (even when we’re making what we
think are healthy choices) is inflaming our immune systems."
Well that’s baloney - wrong diet is inflaming our individual cells (not
the immune system!) by damaging the cell phospho-lipid layer directly -
that’s the the cell wall layer which if intact with the right fatty
acids, will protect the cell from damage and allows nutrients in (if it
is healthy) and toxins out (if it is healthy). Fatty acids are essential
in the right ratios for the health of this phospho-lipid layer. (lipid
means fat as in fatty acid)
Fatty acids have nothig to do with the immune system.
The *principle* that inflammation is the issue - is correct - I just
think he has had tunnel vision about what causes it.
Cytokines (of the immune system) have nothing to do with it.
The inflamamtion is at cell level, not immune system level.
It’s caused by prostaglandins etc - from EXCESS omega-6 and omega-3
oils such as canola oil and flax seed - and from animal fatty acids such
as arachidonic acid. Not from the reaonable amounts of monounsaturated
and polyunsaturate fats in nuts which if eaten in reasonable amounts are
beneficial.
provides a new perspective
> under one cover, something like an executive summary of a large branch
> of food science.
So you believe - but the science is not there if he is confusing
cellwall inflammation with immune system inflammation.
Inflammation is indeed the enemy - and good researchers have known that
a long time - sounds to me like Chilton is trying to make money from
what other scientists discovered. But he seems to hvae failed to read up
on the scientific details so his explanations do not add jup, (nor a
no-nut recommendation.) Maybe he is confusing arachidonic acid with
linoleic acid?
I’ll stick to Dr Nicholas Perricone’s books on inflammation - and he
DOES advocate fresh nuts. He’s one of the pioneer researchers who
actually figured out the inflammation problem - uncovered it and
developed the research to prove it - and I heard his lectures on it in
2001, which caused me to buy his later books as well. Long BEFORE
Chilton decided to write a book and cash in on "inflammation" in 2004.
In my book (’scuse pun) it is always better to go to the original
research rather than someone just writing about it who may not have
understood it very well.
(Perricone by the way has the medical credentials to fully understand
the cell level fuinctions.)
Namaste,
Irene
March 13th, 2007 at 4:37 am
Duncan Crow wrote:
> Yes, but allergic reactions are not only a product of toxins such as
> aflatoxins,
Duncan, You are with respect talking nonsense.
The response of the body to aflatoxin or any other toxin is NOT an
allergic response - it’s a completely different response and depends on
the individual toxin as to what is poisoned and how the body responds!
Allergic reactions on the other hand are very specific responses to
specific (protein) allergens - and an allergen is usually NOT a toxin
though it might be if protein is involved and other conditions are also
meet: The allergen has to first inadvertently get into the blood at a
time when the immune system is TH-2 skewed and therefore the immune
response to the foreign protein will be to develop antibodies as if the
protein was an infection.
A NON-Th-2 skewed system will instead use TH1 cytokines to develop
macrophages to engulf and eliminate the foreign protein - without ever
involving the TH2 antibody system at all (which is supposed to only be a
backup for for in case the TH1 system is overwhelmed by multiplying
infectious agents.)]
So the reaction to aflatoxin is not an "allergic reaction". Aflatoxin is
a poison - a toxin - the body’s response has nothing to do with
allergies! It is a poisoning response, not an allergic response. These
are VERY different responses.
No way!!! Where do you get these ideas? It bothers me that you come out
and make such wild statements on a list where people are serious about
their health.
Allergies are not a product of toxins generally!
The kidneys and liver are responsible for toxin handling as is the skin
and other eumunctories.
[Where did you study immunology?????]
Toxins can build up and overwhelm the kidneys - and when that happens
the liver steps in to try to help out - not the immune system or
allergic response.
> Although excess omega-6 oils contribute in a major way to
> inflammation, and this involves the immune and allergic respnses,
Definitely not.
Again I dunno where you studied immunology but you have been misled,
and maybe need a refund. Allergies involve proteins not fatty acids.
And inflammation due to fatty acids involves the phospho-lipid layer
cell walls and not the immune system.
You have it all muddled up.
> Repeated exposure to any toxin can eventually cause a bona-fide
> allergic reaction.
Again - Not true.
A "bona fide" allergic reaction involves the body’s TH-2 skewed system
recognizing foreign *protein* in the bloodstream. Period. No other way
can an allergic reaction occur.
TOXIC responses are not allergic reactions.
Allergic response to toxin (in the extremely rare case where it occurs)
depends on the toxin and whether it has protein components, AND gets
in the blood AND the immune system is Th-2 skewed - and only then is an
allergic response even possible to a toxin.
MOST toxin exposures cause direct poisoning damage due to the toxicity
of the item - NOT allergic responses.
Allergic responses are the SAME symptoms regardless of allergen -
whereas toxic responses are all different poisoning responses depending
on what damage the specific toxin does in the body.
That’s why toxins are called toxins (poisons)…
and are *not* called allergens (foreign proteins).
NAmaste,
IRene
March 13th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Duncan Crow wrote:
> People are generally unaware of the exact amount of inflammation they
> can encounter on their chosen diet.
Agree.
Not true.
You need to look at the food in total - including not only its fatty
acid ratios but its other nutrients such as minerals and antioxidants -
as these offset the negative fatty acid components.
This is why it is incorrect to call nuts inflamamtory - but it is
correct to call flax oil inflamamtory.
From what you say - Chilton at best has tunnel vision on fatty acids.
For example - walnuts are far more beneficial than Chilton and you claim
due to the high antioxidants included, that are not in other nuts
which don’t need them.
Like it or nut, the nut was not a nutty design:-)
Namaste,
IRene
March 14th, 2007 at 10:42 am
Duncan Crow wrote:
> Irene, I’ve mentioned essential fatty acids expert Floyd H. Chilton’s
> book to you before.
With no more success then than now:-)))
> Inflammation Nation was published in 2005;
No. That’s a reprint. It was in 2004.
> Chilton is a fatty acid expert
???
I have not read his book as if it contains what you say I have no
interest. Even the cover does not claim he is an expert.
> It’s important to understand that it’s not a blood-type factor
There is that AS WELL - even if Chilton has skipped the research on that.
but
> direct inflammatory messengers as in leukotrienes and prostaglandins
> of the arachidoinic acid reactions that interest Chilton.
Really? Then it is odd you have not mentioned arachidonic acid in all
your speeches on PLANT omega-6 and 3s, allergies and immune system
cytokine stories you have been telling? Arachiodonic acid is animal
fatty acid not plant fatty acid :-)) It’s nowhere in your posts
As for the inflamamtory "messages" as you call them - there are specific
eicosanoid components from EACH fatty acid (prostaglandins, thromboxanes
and prostacyclin) that add together in any specific fatty acid - to
EITHER be net inflamamtory in action (as in arachidonic acid) OR be net
anti-inflammatory (as with DHA and EPA as in fish oil).
I do not know why you call them "messengers". They have direct chemical
action such as dilating blood vessels (which lowers pressure in them so
you will see high BP come down) or which dilates kidney vessels
(improving intraglomerular pressure and flow-through) - or doing the
opposite in the case of arachidonic acid’s NET effect.
Each fatty acid has eicosanoid products that are weaker or stronger.
The fish omega-3’s COMPETE with arachidonic acid for eicosanoid
production causing the inflamamtory effect of arachidonic acid to be
lowered and to become anti-inflamamtory instead. SO you can get the
benefits of BOTH fatty acids. It’s a matter of balance in what you eat!
IT’s the NET inflammation that matters, not only the individual bits.
Antioxidants can also undo inflamamtory responses.
WE need ALL the esential fatty acids for various functions. But AA is
not all enemy - it is essential to some functions and so are omega-6
plant oils that you are so against - but the quantity matters - and the
RATIO of anti-inflamamtory ones matters - so that we can get the
benefits of the inflammatory ones while using anti-inflamamtory ones to
overcome the "side effects" of the inflammation potential.
The REAL problem occurs when doctors get into the mix and tell people to
take NSAIDS like aspirin or cox-2 inhibitoprs to supposedly be
anti-inflamamtory or suposedly prevent heart attacks. They are NOT
anti-inflamamtory - they are blockers - they have no direct effect. They
can somewhat block the inflamamtion from inappropriate fatty acids - but
only if they ALSO block the good effects of ANTI-inflamamtory fatty
acids. They basically close the door to both.
So you/we need to see the WHOLE picture, including ALL the types of
fatty acid, plus all drugs that affect it plus all antioxidants plus the
competition between fatty acids for eicosanoids.
It’s not just about the fatty acid components as you have implied with
your Chilton references.
So the ideal is to have PLENTY of DHA and EPA from fish oil (as humans
have a natural block to its internal production in any decent amounts)
AND SOME of the other fatty acid items to cover their functions - and
ZERO Nsaids and cox-2 inhibitors.
> These
> inflammatory factors involve the whole immune response,
No - you need to study the immune system as you do not understand the
difference between immune response (such as in allergies or macrophage
type engulfing lymphocytes) and inflamamtory response which is at cell
level and involves direct chemical action on cell walls and blood vessel
walls - with no immune system involved at all.
blood
> coagulation, heart attack and stroke risk, and fibrosis of the ogans,
> the leading cause of organ failure.
You are flying off at a tangent again here.
The inflamamtory eicosanids from fatty acids affect ALL the cells of the
body, but they are by no stretch of the imagination the only
inflamamtory aspects that affect cells - adn so they are NOt respnsible
for your entire list of evils.
Eating too many carbohydrates is also inflamamtory at cell level. So is
having a high insulin level.
These do different kinds of inflamamtory damage.
Glycation for example.
Do not confuse glycation damage and consequences with prostaglandin ones!
> It’s also important to stress that the inflammatory effect is not
> type-specific, but extends more or less equally to everyone.
You’re wrong in that there are additional inflamamtory factors involving
blood type.
You have tried to put all the blame for inmflamamtion on fatty acids -
but that’s only ONE of many components in cell level inflammation.
Blood type reactions are another one.
The
> exception is that some people convert LA to GLA less than others and
> that will add to their load.
This is also a separate issue. Anyone on this list will likely be short
of the enzyme for this conversion, and would be wise to get a supplement
of blackcurrant oil or whichever one suits their blood type best.
(Blackcurrant works for type O, evening primrose and borage do not)
It’s not. Fatty acids do NOT involve cytokines!
SO?
There’s no *connection* between fatty acids and cytokines!!!
All that said is that both items are out of whack in some diseases.
To be more specific - when one of the T-2 cytokines such as Il-1 (and
there are many more) is too high, the immune system is "Th-2 skewed".
That predisposes many diseases including the few listed - also diabetes
and fibromyalgia are relevant here since we are on a diabetes list.
LTB4 is also high in some diseases, but it’s a separate issue from
the high Il-1. It will just be one more factor to help to push the
system towards disease.
There is no interaction between the skewed immune system and the fact
that fatty acid inflamamtion is high. They are separate factors, not
interacting ones.
It goes on to say fish oil supplements are good, which they are. But
they will not rebalance the out of balance cytokines:-))
They can only help the cell level inflammation to reduce that aspect in
these diseases.
That is why conventional medicine never cures chronic disease, only
tries to "control" it. They use drugs to block eicosanoids (good or bad
eicosanoids) - basically sweeping some of the symptoms under the carpet.
But there is nothing they do to fix the skewed immune system.
So maybe the book had it right but you misinterpreted it as having a
connection between fatty acids and the immune system?
Your quote showed none here - but your posts to the list have been
consistently very flawed whenever you mention immune system or
allergies. I suspwect you have a very basic misundersttanding or lack of
understanding about the immjuen system.
Whether Chilton also does - is now in question, since it is not muddled
in the part you quoted - only in your interpretations in your own posts.
Namaste,
IRene
March 15th, 2007 at 8:36 am
Hi Liz; if Neuromins supplies only DHA you still need an EPA
source. Fish manufacture EPA and DHA; they don’t have to absorb
it from any particular food such as algae. Most plants and algae
don’t contain DHA anyway.
I agree with the comment below fom Dr Cousens; they don’t call
them essential fatty acids for nothing.
Duncan
March 15th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
Irene,
Re: references for my wild statements, I had considered that
you could find them again in a couple of minutes like I did. My
apologies.
This Pubmed search (linolenic acid conversion to DHA) turned up a
lot of work; here follows a passage from a new review in PubMed
titled "Long-chain n-3 PUFA: plant v. marine sources." PMID:
16441943 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
"An important question is whether dietary intake of the precursor
n-3 fatty acid, alpha-linolenic acid (alphaLNA), can provide
sufficient amounts of tissue EPA and DHA by conversion through
the n-3 PUFA elongation-desaturation pathway. alphaLNA is present
in marked amounts in plant sources, including green leafy
vegetables and commonly-consumed oils such as rape-seed and
soyabean oils, so that increased intake of this fatty acid would
be easier to achieve than via increased fish consumption.
However, alphaLNA-feeding studies and stable-isotope studies
using alphaLNA, which have addressed the question of
bioconversion of alphaLNA to EPA and DHA, have concluded that in
adult men conversion to EPA is limited (approximately 8%) and
conversion to DHA is extremely low (<0.1%). In women fractional
conversion to DHA appears to be greater (9%), which may partly be
a result of a lower rate of utilisation of alphaLNA for beta-
oxidation in women."
So, the research is in agreement that plants don’t supply
adequate omega-3 fatty acid, ESPECIALLY DHA. Further, some work
says much less EPA is converted from LNA than this study does.
Chilton’s book — I have a copy — doesn’t disrespect nuts as you
suggest; it analyses the amount of, and describes a balance of,
specific fatty acids in foods, as I already told you. Lots of
people have commented on the bestselling book. I don’t care if
the reviewer whose comment you chose understood the work or not,
or if he doesn’t see any value of an inflammation index. Using it
much as we do an alkaline ash chart or the glycemic index today
will be commonplace.
Your quote here "EXCESS omega-6 and omega-3 oils such as canola
oil and flax seed - and from animal fatty acids such as
arachidonic acid. Not from the reaonable amounts of
monounsaturated and polyunsaturate fats in nuts which if eaten in
reasonable amounts are beneficial", doesn’t recognise that a
potential for excess and imbalance exists even with ‘reasonable
amounts’ of nuts or any other omega-6 contributing food because
all omega-6 intake for the day is additive.
Duncan
March 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Hi Irene;
I think your first mistake in commenting my dicussion with Liz is
not accepting as a given that when people talk about their
‘allergic reactions’, they nearly always mean they have
sensitivity issues, which are really more like ‘multiple chemical
sensitivities’ and not bona fide allergies. But MCS symptoms are
much like allergic symptoms and they do involve the immune
response. I responded in kind to Liz; with respect Irene, people
who have bona-fide allergies are acutely aware of the difference.
A lot of people have sensitivity reactions to aflatoxin,
including anaphylaxis, the ‘classic’ allergic-type reponse. No,
the aflatoxin is not -simply a poisoning- or the dose required to
produce the effect would be similar for everyone. But we know
that many people don’t react at all to the same dose of aflatoxin
that would close the next guy’s throat. So, sensitivity to this
toxin is individual and that reaction can be improved.
I do hope you catch the drift of my nonsense now
Thank you for your summary of TH1 and Th2 involvement. Because
many or even most people are Th-2 skewed they do indeed have a
chronic low level inflammatory (immune) response. Inflammation
brings the immune system into the picture, and I’ve recently
posted some references for you that links the two. Inflammation
also brings chronic blood coagulation into the picture; this
eventuality isn’t handled well by your contention that it’s only
a cell-wall thing.
I can tell that you’ve at least heard of this relationship by
your quote :
March 17th, 2007 at 6:27 am
Duncan,
It was never in question that DHA and EPA need to come from fish oil
rather than plant oil, (as humans do not convert to it readily from
plant sources) - so why this reference?
No apology needed - you are sending refs that have nothing to do with my
comments (which are missing here, you did not quote them, much less the
context) :-))
> This Pubmed search (linolenic acid conversion to DHA) turned up a
> lot of work; ……………
……….
> So, the research is in agreement that plants don’t supply
> adequate omega-3 fatty acid, ESPECIALLY DHA.
Well yes of course. I did not question that. I have always advocated
fish oil supplements and AVOIDING plant oils other than extra virgin
olive oil :-)))
What you said was that nuts specifically are bad. None of this research
verifies that contention:-)
> Chilton’s book — I have a copy — doesn’t disrespect nuts
But you did in your post and that was my complaint :-))
I disagree. It is included in the word "reasonable" that one is not
going overboard:-))
You presented no anti-nut research……
Namaste,
IRene
March 18th, 2007 at 3:15 am
Well Duncan - It may be the norm for you to assume things not allergies
are called allergies - it is not so for me. I find it relevant to be
specific.
We have had technical details in our discussions and that is very
inappropriate if we are not calling a spade a spade.
IMO.
> A lot of people have sensitivity reactions to aflatoxin,
> including anaphylaxis,
Toxic shock is also life threatening but is not anaphylaxis.
It needs to be differentiated (IMO) from a bona fide allergic response
to foreign protein. I have said that before. I stand by it.
The treatment is also different depending which you are seeing.
I’m sorry I can not smear them into one.
Only if the immune system is already skewed to TH-2.
Not otherwise. There is more to it than toxin load. It needs that PLUS
prior immune system skewing.
Sadly most people are skewed as children to TH-2 - by the vaccinations
pumped into them. that is why we mainly see TH-2 chronic illness rather
than TH-1.
But that skewing can be reversed by homeopathy and then you can not
induce illness the same way as is being assumed here.
There is no such thing there as you claim to suggest diabetes is caused
by mitochondrial defect. The words they use are:
"Clinical: Point mutations associated with wide variety of syndromes"
and they include diabetes in a list they have there.
There’s a big difference between "caused by" and "associated with".
Nor does any such association mean all type 1 diabetes is so associated.
It’s important to read scientific papers with care to detail, and not to
jump to conclusions from what is said.
> I do hope you catch the drift of my nonsense now
????
says who
> and I’ve recently
> posted some references for you that links the two.
it failed to link them.
I have a master’s degree in immunology and imunopharmacology. It’s a
very complex subject and a growing one but there is a difference between
cell level inflammation and immune systenm generated inflammation that I
think you have not seen.
Chronic blood coagulation is also at cell level. The fatty acids with
the problematic eicosanoid results (AA) are located in the phospholipid
layer of cell walls. Enzymes split them off, and the eicosanoids so
formed include prostaglandins and thromboxanes (split by cyclo-oxygenase
enzymes) - not just the leukotrienes you listed (split by lipo-oxygenase
enzymes). The prostaglandi 2 series from AA is ALSO inflammatory - while
those from EPA are anti-inflamamtory.
The AA ones *directly* act to inflame by affecting platelet aggregation
and/or constricting blood vessels (Causing high BP) or by affecting
intraglomerular pressure in the kidneys (causing kidney damage from high
pressure and low flow).
YEs it starts with the cell wall, and no it does not involve the immune
system.
No. The skewed immune system is a *prerequisite* to allergic response.
For an immune system response to an *allergen* you also need a specific
antibody to have been developed in the bone marrow - in response to
foreign protein in the blood stream - all at a prior date to allergen
challenge.
The inflamamtory reaction *you* are describing with leukotrienes is
nothing to do with allergens or the immune system. There is no allergen
involved - no pollen or peanut protein or whatever.
There is only an inflamamtory cell level response where leukotriene
directly releases the SAME kind of chemicals that the immune system woul
release IF it was involved.
It’s a short-cut to asthma symptoms that do NOT involve the immune
system or any allergen such as pollen etc.
It’s not a true allergic response - it has the same asthma symptoms but
it is an inflammatory response at cell level.
Namaste,
IRene
March 18th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
Irene, only a couple out of several hundred clients really had bona-
fide allergies although essentially ALL used that very word.
Most had "environmental sensitivities", "multiple chemical
sensitivities" or in other words higher sensitivity than normal,
always accompanied by something like allergic and/or cold symptoms,
and they usually also a slack immune reponse due to the toxin load
and were catching every bug that went through the neighbourhood.
Point is, I’m where the rubber meet the road, treating clients who
don’t use the ight terminology,so unless a client tells me they had
been tested and were "found by tests to be allergic" to specific
substances, I don’t believe it any more right off the bat. Even the
clients who come with a list of "allergies" the Vega Testing unit
coughs up, are mistaken, as is the Vega operator.
I do have a comment to your assertion that diabetes can be caused by
toxins…but
> Only if the immune system is already skewed to TH-2.
> Not otherwise. There is more to it than toxin load. It needs that
PLUS
> prior immune system skewing.
I think arsenic exposure might be an exception to the rule.
What I got out of it is that toxin load causes mitochondrial
disorders when the disorders are not of genetic origin. Obviously
this makes a good case for controlling toxin load to cure the vast
majority of mitochondrial disorders, which are earned rather than
inherited, and diabetes and cancer both make the list.
> It’s important to read scientific papers with care to detail, and
not to
> jump to conclusions from what is said.
I’ve cured a case of inclusion body myositis, a wasting disease with
no cure that kills the client in about four years, by jumping to
these same conclusions. Maybe I can increase my effectiveness
generally, but I hit 100% that time
> I have a master’s degree in immunology and imunopharmacology.
Oh, then you’ll love Haltiwanger’s document. I found it fascinating.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Duncan Crow wrote:
> Irene, only a couple out of several hundred clients really had bona-
> fide allergies although essentially ALL used that very word.
Hopefully you re-educated them on what is allergy and what is not?
> I do have a comment to your assertion that diabetes can be caused by
> toxins…but
I did not say it can be caused by toxins - you did:-))
I said it needed special circumstances to have toxin involvement.
Duncan - I find this argument futile. I feel I stated how I see it
clearly enough, and spent many, many hours doing so in the most
reasonable way I cold.
I have to choose where I spend what time so I can only hope something I
said was useful somewhere.
Namaste,
IRene