Inflammation Nation gist
Irene, our discussion has taken longer than if you had bought
the book, read it and then compared notes 
I’ll just comment on the gist of your post:
Here’s the connection to the immune system given by the book
Inflammation Nation: Fatty acid imbalance (excess omega-6)
increases leukotrienes thus arachidonic acid and inflammation,
and this increases the body’s responsiveness to potential
allergens or to itself. Hyperresponsiveness, which involves the
immune system’s white blood cells flooding to the areas, itself
generates damage, and further activity by the immune system is
required as it cleans up. Hyperresponsiveness self-propagates
because the inflammation keeps pushing it. In this way the EFAs
that promote inflammation as well as the relative lack of EFAs
that relive it can be seen as a seriously aggravating and even
causative factor for an overactive immune reponse.
This is especially important as one ages and arachidonic acid
levels are naturally higher anyway, as indicated in a study done
by Chilton’s laboratory and published in the Journal of
Nutritional Health and Aging. Ain’t planned obsolescence a bitch?
I’m not sure if Chilton mentions that if the EFAs are not in
balance cellular function suffers as omega-6 oils will occur in
cell walls in absence of the right omega-3. Even without the
problem of excess omega-6 in fat cells (causes overweight PMID:
14969504 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] ) where there should be
saturated fat, there could be quite a number of ounces of
potentially damaging omega-6 in places it’s not wanted (cell
walls) alone. An omega-3 program can correct this by the way.
Anyway, the cell wall compromise could reasonably affect white
blood cell function too.
According to Chilton, diseases listed that are KNOWN to be caused
by inflammation include: asthma, allergies, rheumatoid arthritis,
atopic dermatitis, gout, lupus, crohn’s, colitis, psoriasis,
scleroderma.
Diseases THOUGHT to be caused by overactive inflammation include:
atheosclerosis, diabetes, chronic kidney failure, hepatitis,
thyroid diease, pancreatitis, osteoarthritis, chronic bronchitis,
emphysema.
Other diseases SUSPECTED of being caused by inflammation include
alzheimer’s and cancer.
Chapter material is referenced in the back of the book; the point
isn’t the source of the inflammation in the above diseases, but
inflammation is additive and all of them are certainly aggravated
by any additional inflammation source. I think it’s worthy of
note that asthma is in this book the result of excessive immune
system involvement due to inflammation.
Inflammation Nation shows how to get as close as possible to zero
daily overactive inflammation using our potent dietary fats to
inhibit the production of leukotrienes and interrupt the
formation of the arachidonic acid and the inflammation. (And to
reduce dietary AA) This can reduce an inappropriate reaction in
as few as seven days, just like it says on the book’s cover.
The book shines by providing readable insight and followable
direction on how you can exert firm control of one important
facet of the diet, and thus increase health and probably
longevity.
It doesn’t, as you point out, address oxidative and other toxin
sources of inflammation but this is also easy to control.
March 17th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Duncan Crow wrote:
> Irene, our discussion has taken longer than if you had bought
> the book, read it and then compared notes
Duncan I buy a lot of books but only if I have reason to think I shall
learn from them. In this case I am as yet unconvinced.
That’s a gross oversimplification.
It is only the increase in Arachidonic acid (AA) in particular that is
relevant to the increase in leukotrienes. That’s why I was sirprised at
the absence of AA in your leukotriene discussions.
So your view that any omega-6 such as that in walnuts, is relevant -
is not correct. Walnuts have omega THREE linolenic acid (LNA) - not
omega-SIX Arachidonic acid.
LNA as in walnuts, can convert to the anti-inflamamtory EPA as in fish
oil, not the inflamamtory AA as in meat.
The *plant* fatty acid that converts to AA is omega-6 linoleic acid (LA)
EPA can also cause their formation - but only EPA’s can form
leukotrienes besides AA. They only make the weak 5 series ones
considered anti-inflamamtory - not the highly inflamamtory 4-series ones
formed from AA.
In addition, any EPA (such as from fish oil supplement) will compete
with AA for the enzymes used to form eicosanoids, effectively shutting
out any conversion of AA to inflamamtory eicosanoids, and only allowing
anti-inflammatory eicosanoids from EPA.
Nowhere in here is the walnut LNA, except as a way to get to extra EPA
(very inefficiently).
> thus arachidonic acid and inflammation,
Exactly. Your posts talk about walnut and inflammation not arachidonic
(from meat) and inflammation.
> and this increases the body’s responsiveness to potential
> allergens or to itself.
No. The leukotrienes from AA directly release chemicals from mast cells.
That can not increase sensitivity to allergens or introduction of
allergens or change any cytokines in the immune system in any direct
way. It is a cell level inflammatory response - not an immune system
response.
The chemical released can have nasty effects including asthma responses.
But the asthma is due to the inflamamtory cell responses - not to immune
system activity. TEHre is no white blood cell response involved.
(Researchers used to assume this when they first discovered leukotrienes
as they saw them associated with white cells.)
But the real source of leukotrienes is the phospholipid layer of the
cell membrane. That’s where the fatty acids live and that’s where they
are split out into eicosanoids by enzymes.
> Hyperresponsiveness, which involves the
> immune system’s white blood cells flooding to the areas,
is unrelated to leukotrienes.
No. The EFAs that promote inflammation (such as AA) do seriously
aggravate existing or initiate new inflamamtory responses, but in a
direct way by their action on mast cells and other cells - and not by
any immune system involvement much less any cytokine involvement as your
emails stated.
There’s no argument from me that AA is bad and you need a lot of fish
oil supplement to prevent it from producing the inflamamtory eicosanoids
(including not just leukotrienes but also the prostaglandin series.)
Your posts however did not talk about that.
It’s not helpful to generalize about omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids.
Some are beneficial and some are inflamamtory - you need to be specific.
ALL chronic diseases involve cell level inflamamtion PLUS a skewed
immune system - not one but both are relevant. HOwever some disease
involve TH-1 skeweing (like MS and some chronic liver dsieases) and
others involve the opposite Th-2 skewing.
EVERY disease has a specific ratio of cytokine imbalances. There are
lots of cytokines in the immune system, and each needs to be at a
specific correct level for the immune system not to be out of balance.
IT *HAS* to be out of balance for disease to be able to occur - chronic
disease that is. So you will first see an out of balance immune system -
and if you then add inflammation such as from an inflamamtory diet, you
will *then* see the disease related to the specific cytokine imbalances
of the immune system.
Scintists have not yet decoded all the cytokines and their interactions
- nor have they fully documents\ed which ones are skewed how in what
disease. But there is at least a start being made in that research - and
it is known that we need to find the relevant cytokine story for each
illness.
The Russians are ahead of us. In USa the only cytokine used "routinely"
to help re-balance the immune system is interferon. It helps only if the
interferon is low in the disease being considered. Inh Russia they also
have interleukin-2 in regular use (Ronkoleukin-2 is the product but it
is not approved in USA)
Immunology is a new science, and understanding of the immune system is
in an early growth phase still.. It means that books on this need to be
VERY up to date to have value:-(((
No. Asthma initiated by leukotrienes does happen but that is NOT
something involving the immune system. To have asthma at all - the
immune system has to be Th-2 skewed FIRST - and then if you ADD
leukotrienes they will act at the cellular level to release inflamamtory
chemicals that damage the lungs, and cause an asthma response. But you
can ALSO cause an allergic response by inhaling an allergen and
initiating an immune system response by another route.
The immune system is NOT involved in leukotriene responmse. That’s
direct to the cells.
Nor will someone eating meat (and thus AA) automatically have asthma.
There have to be several factors all present to initiate it. And it can
initiate in MORE than one way - leucotrienes are one way =- immune
system response with antibody is another way.
There are lots of ways to eat an anti-inflamamtory diet. I use Dr
Perricone’s books for this - he knows his eicosanoids from his cytokines
too, and does not diss nuts for no valid reason
I thank you for discussing the book in more depth - but I am no more
impressed by it than I was the first time. Sorry.
> It doesn’t, as you point out, address oxidative and other toxin
> sources of inflammation but this is also easy to control.
Perricone addresses all cell level inflammation and all ways to beat it
with diet. It’s why people say, that as I get older, I am looking
younger. I kinda like it:-))
Thank you for the discussion.
NAmaste,
IRene
March 18th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
> Duncan I buy a lot of books but only if I have reason to think I
> shall learn from them.
Irene, your train of thought missed a major point (Here’s your quote)
Like I was saying?
"Chemical composition of selected edible nut seeds" (J Agric Food
Chem. 2006).
"With the exception of macadamia, linoleic acid (C(18:2)) was the
major polyunsaturated fatty acid. In the case of walnuts, in addition
to linoleic acid (59.79%) linolenic acid (C(18:3)) also significantly
contributed toward the total polyunsaturated lipids."
> Your posts talk about walnut and inflammation not arachidonic
> (from meat) and inflammation.
You recommended to eat nuts, specifically mentioning walnuts, and I
cautioned against excess for good reason, and I showed that the
relatively high linoleic acid leads to inflammation so the amount has
to be tabulated into the total. That’s all. Chilton does expose the
inflammatory index of a lot of meats too, and carbs.
I know that’s what you contend; excuse me if I still doubt your word,
if only because of the locally increased white cell count due to the
inflammation. You postulated the inflammation doesn’t involve the
immune system; however, Chilton, afatty acids expert presents the
cenario as a general overreaction of the immune system fueled by the
inflammation. This can be seen for example as excessive inflammation
in athritis, a Th2-skewed response to be sure, but it involves an
ovestimulated immune response, and a product that reduces the
oveactive Th2 is called an immunomodulator.
Obviously this is a new concept to you and maybe one that might
induce you to buy the book, even a grossly oversimplified one written
for the layman.
So we’ll go further down the post …
And note that we do agree the inflammation seriously aggravates a
generally overamped system. My previous post cited research that
mentioned omega-6 oil results in higher inflammatory cytokines, right?
> There’s no argument from me that AA is bad and you need a lot of
fish
> oil supplement to prevent it from producing the inflamamtory
eicosanoids
> (including not just leukotrienes but also the prostaglandin series.)
> Your posts however did not talk about that.
No, I’m not writing a bok; my posts only implicated walnuts and other
omega-6 containing foods as part of the problem of excess that has to
be accounted for.
Agreed.
Man, that was loong letter. Besides the chicken-or egg argument,
we’re essentially in agreement that excess omega 6 oil and the
inflammation it causes should be controlled because it seriously adds
to the damage. And I still recommend undenatured whey and Transfer
Factor as immunomodulators because balance is the opposite of
unnecessary damage.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:40 am
Read again :
Walnut has linoLENic acid omega THREE
but it is linoLEIc acid omega SIX that converts to inflammatory AA
…IRene
March 29th, 2007 at 11:54 am
Irene, you missed the boat on your walnut comment.
To be clear, the figures I have are that walnut oil contains 38.8%
omega-SIX linoleic acid, which converts to AA as you correctly noted,
and just 9.1% omega-THREE linolenic acid (LNA), which is nearly
useless.
So, walnuts do contribute a large percentage of their oil towards
omega-SIX-caused inflammation, just as I pointed out, no buts about
it. Time to update old notions.
Duncan
March 29th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
YOUR old notions perhaps:-)
It’s what ELSE is in walnut that overcomes the 39% omega-6 and goes on
to add other benefits:-)
Read the research and the content analysis. I posted some of it, but you
ignored it.
Namaste,
IRene
March 30th, 2007 at 7:39 am
> Duncan Crow wrote:
>> omega-SIX linoleic acid, which converts to AA as you correctly noted,
By the way - you misquote me:
No I did not say "which converts to AA".
I noted that it is CAPABLE of being converted - not the same thing at all.
I also noted that walnut (and/or other beneficial fresh raw nuts) be the
ONLY source of omega-6 which by the way we die without - so that we get
what O-6 we need from a beneficial source that includes the ingredients
to COUNTER the inflamamtory aspects. You can not go without O-6 just
because it has inflamamtory aspects - it also has essential body
functions we need - in the right amounts!
I explained all that. Don’t take it out of context!!
If you can’t quote me when answering my emails I’ll assume you have
nothing valid to say in future, and are attacking in order "to look
right" instead of for reasons to do with understanding health.
I nowhere advocated a source of O-6 that did not include the
anti-inflamamtory countermeasures to the inflamamtory aspects of O-6.
The total inflammatory plus anti-inflammatory result needs to be on the
side of anti-inflamamtory - and for walnut it most definitely is. So you
get the O-6 you NEED along with something to counter its inflamamtory
effects (which are more than countered by the other walnut components.)
And I DID explain it.
..Irene
March 30th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
My understanding is that a potential exists for omega-3 EPA and
DHA, and if those are present, also GLA, to reduce inflammation,
but only if the omega-6 load is not excessive. If omega-6 intake
is excessive (beyond essential requirement), I understand that
you can’t just counter it by adding more good oil; you have to
reduce omega-6 oil as well.
We know that excess omega-6 interferes with normal biological
function and even cell wall structure. So, should I word the
question to you to be more specific, "what content do you propose
is in the walnut oil that counteracts this particular reaction"?
Duncan
March 31st, 2007 at 8:09 am
Duncan Crow wrote:
> My understanding is that a potential exists for omega-3 EPA and
> DHA, and if those are present, also GLA, to reduce inflammation,
Also antioxidants.
Walnut has plenty..
> but only if the omega-6 load is not excessive.
It’s not to do with absolute measure but ratio.
The inflammatory or anti-inflamamtory effect is determined from a total
of the antioxidants plus oleic acid plus EPA plus DHA etc - and whether
there is enough of these to counter any inflamamtory effect.
It’s the NET effect that counts.
> "what content do you propose
> is in the walnut oil that counteracts this particular reaction"?
Not the walnut oil - the walnuts.
I suggested if you remember - fresh raw nuts, not walnut oil.
They contain selenium, very high gamma-tocopherals, beta-carotene and
zeaxanthin and phyticv acid - all in significant amounts, all
antioxidant. The nut coating also contains antioxidant polyphenols,
especially those associated with reduced cancer risk. Walnuts are
especially high in ellagic acid, another antioxidant that also is known
for it scancer-fighting properties. (You get ellagic also in pomegranate
and red raspberry).
They also have significant monounsaturated fatty acids that are not
inflamamtory (along with 8% omega-3 polyunsatured acid). They have very
significant amounts of other beneficial nutrients that help the
metabolism overall including especially manganese, zinc, folic acid
(which also lowers homopcysteine), magnesium and iron (with the copper
to absorb it well). They are also high in potassium without being high
in sodium. They are high in plant phytosterols (specifically
beta-sitosterol and campsterol). they have high arginine to help prevent
tumor growth and boost immunity.
Studies also show they reduce total and LDL cholesterol levels, and
that the phtosterols in nuts inhibit accumulation of fats in artery
walls (which is preventive for angina, strokes, and heart attacks.)
A 14 year study of on over 86,000 women showed that c
onsumption of 5 ounces of nuts weekly cuts risk of CHD by 35% compared
to those eating less than an ounce per month.
Another 17 year study on over 21,000 men found those who consumed nuts
at least twice a week cut their risk of sudden cardiac death by 53%
compared to those who rarely ate nuts.
Walnuts are an all around good food:-)
You’re right to knock vegetable oils other than olive oil for their
excessive omega-6 inflammatory-promoting characteristics - stuff like
corn oil, canola, flax, sunflower, safflower, and soy oils are all bad -
but not the nuts. That would be nuts:-)
Namaste,
IRene
March 31st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Irene, I had not seen documentation that inflammation from the
eicosanoid/arachidonic acid reaction is counteracted by
antioxidants. Do you have studies for that? If it’s true, it
makes a case for taking glutathione precursors, as glutathione is
always depleted in illness.
You say my understanding that the inflammation caused by any more
than the essential amount of omega-6 oil is additive and can not
be compensated for by simply adding EPA and DHA, is only partly
true. Your indication that you can eat lots of omega-6 oil
provided you get lots of EPA and DHA to keep the ratio correct
gives me some concern, not only because I haven’t seen work to
that effect either, but you did say it’s a theory. Also, I’m
aware that gaining weight inceases inflammation on its own.
Next, in comments in various research that mention ‘reduced
cardiovascular risk’, what they usually measured is LDL
cholesterol reduction, but they mention the popular and erroneous
notion (an utter fabrication by big business) that high LDL
cholesterol is equated to heart disease. Do you have the studies
you mentioned so I can see what was measured?
If the subjects experienced this increased risk more directly by
getting heart disease it would be a more valid obervation than
estimating any risk after measuring LDL cholesterol. This
seemingly small point is of great importance because people with
a depleted antioxidant pool have a greatly increased risk of
heart disease whether they have high LDL or not. In other words,
just as many people with low and normal LDL have heart disease as
people with high cholesterol because heart disease is not even
about cholesterol.
Lastly, as a similar example to your walnuts, selenium is only
found in Brazil nuts from Brazil, which has selenium in the soil.
Brazil nuts grown in Central America, which has no selenium in
the soil, have no selenium concentration.
Walnuts are also concentrating available selenium, so as with the
Brazil nuts example you have to know where the nuts are grown to
know if you’re getting any selenium at all from that source. Most
of North and Central America are deficient in this crucial
mineral so I tell my clents to supplement to the tune of 200-600
mcg daily, and even more if there is arsenic in their drinking
water. Arsenic depletes selenium and this is a prevalent problem
in many regions of the world.
Arsenic is recognised as a cause of diabetes, cancer and
presumably other mitochondrial disorders, and relying on nuts to
supply selenium is a guess or a leap of faith. A person
pactically anywhere in the world could easily be operating under
a false sense of security while continuing to cause their
diabetes through this very mechanism; a hard look at this part of
their health regime could be very beneficial.
April 1st, 2007 at 6:15 am
Duncan - You have not got my words correct (yet again), I did not say
what you claim - so I repeat - QUOTE my words and comment them if you
want a response.
.Irene