Genocide? You Decide! The James Carlson Interview Part 2 (Episode 146)
12 06 2008If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Welcome back for another great interview with one of the nation’s most exciting low-carb personalities brought to you exclusively by your favorite low-carb podcast–“The Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore!”
In today’s episode, Jimmy presents the conclusion of his incredible interview with the oh-so-very wise and highly approachable physician, James “Don’t Call Me Doctor!” Carlson. Despite having such an extensive background in a number of academic fields, including law, economics, medicine, biochemistry and more, Dr. Carls…er, I mean, James prefers to keep the playing field level so people are not intimidated by any prefix to his name. That’s one of the reasons why he is such an endeared low-carb proponent because he doesn’t pretend to be some hifalutin prima donna! What you see and hear from James is what you get.
Part 2 of the James Carlson interview has Jimmy presenting him with an amazing list of health conditions that low-carb is an ideal treatment for and is included in his book Genocide, looking at the importance of STAYING ON low-carb throughout your pregnancy and for nursing mothers, and continuing to lament and shake their heads at the sorry state of nutritional awareness by medical doctors in modern society.
If you missed Part 1 in Episode 145 on Monday, then go back and listen to that first and then come back here. If you caught Episode 145, then you already know; this is the interview you DON’T want to miss! Save both shows and listen to them again and again whenever you need encouragement and reminders about just how healthy livin’ la vida low-carb really is.
Support our new sponsor True Lemon by clicking on the logo above
Sign up to receive your FREE SAMPLES of calorie-free, carb-free True Lemon, True Lime, and True Orange packets by visiting www.TrueLemon.com today. Special THANKS to True Lemon for sponsoring The Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore!
LINKS MENTIONED IN EPISODE 146
- RELATED PODCAST: Dr. James Carlson interview Part 1
- Dr. James E. Carlson’s explosive new health book Genocide: How Your Doctor’s Dietary Ignorance Will Kill You!!!!
- WalkRadio.com’s “Ask The Expert” Nutrition page for Dr. Carlson
- Dr. Carlson’s Amazon.com blog
- The John Freeman book on using a low-carb diet for children with seizures that Dr. Carlson mentioned: The Ketogenic Diet: A Treatment for Children and Others with Epilepsy
- RELATED BLOG POST: “‘Mindless Eating’ Author Appointed USDA’s New Director Of Nutrition Policy And Promotion”
- RELATED BLOG POST: “Christine’s Triglycerides Plummet 55% In Just Six Weeks On A Truly Low-Carb Diet”
Popularity: 40% [?]
From over 400 pounds to 230, Jimmy Moore is 
An alcohol question: Dr. Carlson said that alcohol is treated like a carbohydrate in the body. The alcohol itself doesn’t raise insulin levels. However, in my experience it does have a strong effect on weight loss. Can you elaborate on the underlying mechanism that could account for this. Is is hormonal? Cortisol?
For example, 3 drinks of vodka have only 300 calories which, consumed regularly, would reduce weight loss by 1/2 to 3/4 pounds per week, but instead I’ve noticed that weight loss comes to a complete standstill.
Thanks.
GREAT QUESTION, Dave! I’ll present it to Dr. Carlson for an answer.
Great show, Jimmy! Wow, I don’t think I’ve ever heard a Doctor admit they were wrong, much less apologize! He really makes it easy to understand. And thanks for asking about the weight gain–it reminds us that other factors like stress, overdoing it, can be involved in weight gain.
wow! wow! wow! woohoo!!! I love it, love it, love it!!! I am sharing this interview with everyone!! My mind is racing right now!! thanks so much!!
It was my pleasure to present this interview, Caroline. I thought it was interesting that Dr. Carlson was just as perplexed about why my weight has been erratic despite low-carb lately. I’m sure if I went in to see him that we could get to the bottom of it.
Happy to get your mind racing, Teresa.
THANKS for listening!
Hi everyone!
This is in response to Dave in Ohio’s question about alcohol. Alcohol is a little tricky because some studies show it has no effect on insulin secretion, other studies say it does. In the studies that show alcohol has an effect on insulin secretion, an effect is seen immediately, as well as a late stage effect ,meaning a few hours after alcohol is ingested, the insulin level rises again.
Now, we do know that alcohol impairs a process called gluconeogenesis which occurs in the liver. This is a big fancy way of saying new blood sugar formation. So, with alcohol consumption, our liver’s ability to produce new blood sugar is impared, and that is why a diabetic, who is on blood sugar lowering meds, may pass out when drinking. This is due to low blood sugar.
If you are having difficuly loosing weight and are drinking alcohol, I suggest you either lower your alcohol intake, or stop entirely. You may be the one who is seeing an increase in insulin secretion via the alcohol. Remember, over secrete insulin and you will have a greater difficulty losing weight.
Now, the studies which showed no effect on insulin secretion, did show increased insulin sensitivity-which is a good thing. Which means that if you’re a diabetic, moderate alcohol consumption can help control blood sugars better. But be careful, because too much alcohol has the reverse effect-meaning it causes the blood sugar to be less controlled.
What’s fascinating is that the studies which showed insulin secretion to increase with alcohol intake was done on rats and the study which showed no effect (except possibly with high alcohol intake) was done on humans. My first thought was what’s a rat doing drinking anyway, it might not find its way out of the sewer. But all kidding aside, there is a vast difference in the molecular biophysiology between rats and humans so we need to be very catious when evaluating the results of the increased insulin secretion study in response to alcohol.
Just one more question Dave-when you say alcohol has a strong effect on weight loss, did you mean it should slow it down or speed it up. I know you said your weight loss came to a complete standstill; so I’m thinking it stopped your weight loss. One last thing, forget calories, they mean nothing and are only adding to the confusion. Hope this helps. Bye for now.
The sentiment that i want to convey is usually said by the phrase “right on the money”, in this case, better said by “right on the truth”. Wow!. Fantastic presentation. Thank you, Jimmy, and thank you , James.
THANKS for listening, Deora! I will DEFINITELY have Dr. Carlson back again in the future.
Hi Jimmy,
I found your website via Marks Daily Apple and have really enjoyed reading your blog posts and listening to your podcasts - especially the interviews with experts like Dr. Carlson and Gary Taubes. After reading Good Calories, Bad Calories and sites like Marks Daily Apple/Modern Forager/etc, I have minimized grains in my diet (special occasions only). However, I am having a hard time eliminating fruit from my diet, especially now that it is summer and so many fruits are in season. I’m guessing that because of my fruit intake, my daily carb intake is around 100 grams or a little higher. In this interview you say that for maximum health it should be much lower than that, ideally around 20 grams. I will add that I am a young, healthy, 22 year old woman who exercises regularly and has a BMI at the low end of the normal range. Am I harming my health by continuing to eat a few servings of fruit per day?
Thanks,
Sally
THANKS for writing, Sally! I wouldn’t say you are necessarily “harming your health” eating those fruits, but keep in mind that the sugar in fruit reacts just the same way that eating white sugar does. In other words, the blood sugar spikes, the insulin rush and all the health implications that come from that. Certainly you are better off eating fruit than drinking a sugary soda with a Ho-Ho. But if you can get away from the sugar altogether, then your health will experience some truly amazing things. TRY IT!
THANK YOU for listening and keep on livin’ la vida low-carb!
Regarding Dr. Carlson’s discussion of the man who ate 10,000 calories a day and lost weight:
Dr. Carlson said, “The calorie means nothing.” If that is so, what happened to the macronutrients in the 10 cheeseburgers eaten every day by the dieter in question? Did they somehow avoid entering the electron transport chain and undergoing oxidative phosphorylation? Were they excreted in some form? Did something else happen to them? Thanks for any insight you can provide.
Awesome question! It’s the same question that actually started me wondering if calories meant anything. By macronutrients I assume you mean carbs, protein and fat. Since the patient was eating only cheeseburgers without the bun and fries, this means they were only eating protein, fat and cholesterol. It’s interesting you mention the oxidative phosphorylation pathway, as this pathway is what gives rise to the bulk of ATP. If we analyze the macronutrient content of cheeseburgers one gets protein, fat and cholesterol. So let’s analyze further what happens to each macronutrient. When we eat protein, we will use it to repair tissue damage or poop it out, there is no storage shelf for protein; so the protein part of the burger, most of it, would be eliminated in the stool. The only thing left, macronutrient wise, is the fat of the burger. Interesting thing about fat, is that our bodies prefer to use it for energy, despite popular opinion. Now, it must be emphasized that the patient in question was over 400 pounds, so this individual would need alot of ‘energy’ just to get through the day, without being fatigued. When he started eating the ten cheeseburgers, he felt better, had more energy, and lost more weight. So, as per the patient, he became more active which helped with weight loss. The oxidative phosphorylation chain is the last pathway for ATP production. Certainly protein, via amino acids, can get into this pathway; but you will also find your fatty acids, through the beta oxidation pathway, finding their way into this pathway as well. The bottom line, and it really is not that complicated, is that insulin release was being curtailed; and it was (probably) the fact that insulin release dropped which helped with the weight loss. Some of the macronutrients found their way into the hydrogen electron transport chain; but others, most, probably did not get that far,as they were (had to be) excreted. Thing is, I am still trying to figure out biochemically what I witnessed first hand. Thanks for a great question!
Thanks for your response, Dr. Carlson! I have another question, if you have the time. If not, thanks for getting back to me. By the way, yes, I intended “macronutrients” to mean carbohydrates, protein and fat. And, as you inferred, I’m speaking of a person who is eating a very low carbohydrate diet.
You said, “When we eat protein, we will use it to repair tissue damage or poop it out, there is no storage shelf for protein; so the protein part of the burger, most of it, would be eliminated in the stool.”
That’s true, there is no storage shelf for protein. However, there are at least a couple for glucose. In a person who is well-adapted to a ketogenic diet, one might expect the ketogenic amino acids to be converted to ketones and thence to energy. Glucogenic amino acids might be expected to be fed into the Krebs cycle if they were needed for energy. If these were not needed for energy, they could be converted to glucose and stored as glycogen, or converted to fatty acids and stored as triglycerides. Are you saying that if ingested amino acids are not needed for protein synthesis or for maintenance of blood glucose, the body will preferentially eliminate them in the stool rather than use them as a current or potential source of energy?
Hi Again!
It appears as if that’s the case. You are obviously very well versed in your biochemistry, and everything you said above, about amino acids being converted to sugar and then to trigs, is true. Biochemically speaking, if the insulin level remains low (or lower), the signals will not be around for the creation and dynamic storage of triglycerides. One will find glucagon (and growth hormone) in higher relative quantities and the signals for fat utilization will predominate. The body then, preferentially, uses triglycerides (via the beta-oxidation pathway) for ATP creation (of course via the Krebs and the oxidative phosphorylation chain).
Amono acids can be converted and used for fuel, this will happen only if the body has no other fuel source. Interesting thing about starvation diets is that before the body starts to use fat for fuel, after all the glycogen stores in the liver and muscle are used up; it will utilize lean body mass for energy. This means the body uses the muscle mass and other protein sources for ATP production (which includes the heart muscle) and this is why starvation diets are deadly.
Getting back to our protein, if one consumes protein on a low carb diet, and you better be eatimg fat along with that protein, we will use it to repair and then eliminate it as the signals are not around for the amino acids to be utilized for fuel. I hope this helps. By the way, I am very impressed with your biochemical knowledge! Let’s keep the commentary going!
Thanks again for answering! You’re right, I do know biochemistry. Physiology not so much.
Thanks for the invitation to continue the dialog. Here goes:
Let’s consider a zero-carber who eats plenty of protein and plenty of fat. (In other words, there are no caloric starvation issues and no rabbit starvation issues to contend with. For the sake of discussion, let’s also specify that he is taking a perfect complement of nutritional supplements, so there are no vitamin or mineral deficiencies to address.)
Our zero-carber eats a meal of meat and fat. As you know, insulin is released after protein ingestion. And as you have said, glucagon and growth hormone are also released. Is it possible that for this man, under one set of circumstances the actions of insulin for energy storage will predominate, and under another set of circumstances the actions of glucagon for energy utilization will predominate?
Specifically I am thinking of the historical Inuit people. If the explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson was correct, these people lived for at least nine months of the year on nothing but meat and fish. Sefansson himself famously lived for an entire year on a JAMA-supervised diet of nothing but meat and fat. The Inuit and Stefansson presumably had some percentage of body fat, muscle glycogen and liver glycogen. This would argue that ingested fat can be stored as fat, or failing that, that ingested protein could be converted to glucose and end up being stored as fat. It would also argue that ingested protein (and the glycerol backbones of triglycerides) can be converted to glucose and then be stored as glycogen.
My question is, what do you think is the regulatory mechanism? Mr. 10,00-calories-a-day could afford to lose lots of lipid and protein in his stools, and happily lose some of his own body fat in the process. The Inuit and Mr. Stefansson probably could not. What do you suppose provides the tipping point? My guess would be a hormone, but which one–leptin, perhaps?
Possibly Leptin, but I am certain there are other hormones we haven’t even discovered yet. Now let me just state that my 10,000 calorie a day patient only stayed at that caloric level for a few months. As he lost weight, he ate less ‘calories’ in the form of less food. Remember, my stance is that the calorie is a red herring, and I do focus more on Insulin to help explain things.
Looking at the Inuits, and by the way, I am familiar with the Stefansson ‘experiment’, they are only eating protein and fat. Yes, insulin is released with the consumption of protein and fat, but more glucagon is secereted which tips the scales in favor of fat utilization for energy and against the dynamic storage of fat. Since there is less insulin, the body will make less cholesterol as well, which is why the heart disease risk is ‘lower’ in the Inuits not higher. As a quick aside, you need to check out Gary Taubes’ Good Calories, Bad Calories if you haven’t done so yet. Anyway, yes amino acids can certainly be converted to glucose and eventually end up as a triglyceride; and remember the glycerol molecule itself can be converted to a sugar molecule. It all goes back to acetyl Co A, which is the controlling molecule. Acetyl Co A’s can be converted to trigs, cholesterol, can enter the Kreb’s-it all depends on the relative concentrations of insulin and glucagon. So I guess the tipping point would be the relative concentrations of insulin to glucagon.
As I was reviewing my answer, it appears I did not answer your question fully. In response to insulin acting differently in different circumstances, it certainly could be possible,and that would be where other signaling molecules could come into play.
Oh my word. This biochemistry questions and answers = my food!!! Stargazey please ask some more !! I absolutely love this hehe!
Dr. Carlson, is there maybe a website or good source that you can recommend for somebody who wants to know more about the biochemistry on a low-carb way of eating or even on both low-carb and low-fat ? Possibly more on the higher (easier) level to understand for somebody who never studies Biochemistry (the same level that you explain in your answers).
I have already read Gary Taubes’s book Diet Delusion.
Thank you very much
There is an outstanding blog that offers nuggets of scientific information to back up the truths of low-carbing.
Low-Carb for You
Actually it’s my blog and whether it’s outstanding is in the eye of the beholder.
Anyway, I hope you find it interesting and inspirational.
Stargazey
It’s pretty outstanding, Stargazey!
I spoke to a physiologist friend of mine, and she pointed out that when people eat mass quantities of food, absorption by the gut and transport from the blood into the cells both become issues. Normally the gut absorbs 90-95% of the protein we eat and about 95% of the fat we eat. But it’s not hard to imagine that the proteases, lipases, bile salts and pancreatic enzymes may be overwhelmed with 10,000 calories’ worth of food.
Even if the fat and amino acids are absorbed and find their way into the circulation, there may be a limit on how many of them are taken up into cells if the uptake is dependent on active transport processes. Normally the body does not like to waste energy, but if it gets vastly more energy than it needs, it probably has no choice but to excrete some of it, as Dr. Carlson has said.
Dr. Carlson, if you’re still around, I just read one of your posts on Jimmy’s discussion board. You said,
“It’s interesting because while the glycemic index sounds good in theory, it does not work clinically. Any diabetic who attempts to use the glycemic index as a guide, will have elevated blood sugars as a result. I read one book about the glycemic index, written by a group of Australian researchers, after getting about a third of the way through the book, I threw it out. The book stated that eating things like potatotes and whole wheat pasta would not raise the blood sugar much as the sugar is released more slowly through digestive processes. What happens in reality is that one may not see an immediate rise, but the sugar does rise a few hours after eating the ‘low glycemic’ index foods, and can stay elevated for many hours thereafter. Can I hear a great big oops!”
My question is, is this also true of products such as Atkins Advantage bars? For example, the “Net Atkins [Carb] Count” may be 2 per bar, but the Nutrition Facts says that each bar contains 22 grams of carbohydrate, 10 grams of which are dietary fiber. Does that mean that I will eventually need to secrete enough insulin to cover 12 net grams of carbohydrate rather than the 2 grams they advertise?
Thanks again for all the time you are taking to answer my questions. It’s very much appreciated!
Oh my word Stargazey what a nice blog ! I am adding it to my facebook group “The low carb way - South Africa”. I just have one question if you dont mind, why is the fats so low on the lowcarb pyramid ?
Stageazey you might also want to read chapter 12 on “Sugars” in the book Good Calories by Gary Taubes. There he explains why the gi/gl index is unstable especially when you look at foods containing fructose.
Hello again!
Another great question! OK, so you are correct to subtract the fiber from the total carbs, which brings you down to about 12 grams of carbs (depending on the bar). But how did Atkins get down to 2 effective grams? He did this by adding things like glycerin and maltodextrin to the ingredient list, which have a negligible effect on blood sugar and of course insulin. I know this because my diabetic patients who consume these bars do not see a rise in their blood sugars.
Great input JayCee! Like I’ve stated, the GI appears fine in theory, but when I attempted it in clinical practice, it just did not work; so I basically ignore it and tell my patients to as well. I wish I could help with the low carb pyramid and fat question, but I wasn’t even aware there was a low carb pyramid. I’d love a link so I can check it out.
Dr Carlson,
The low-carb pyramid link I refer to is from Stargazey’s wonderfull blogsite :
http://lowcarb4u.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-should-we-low-carb.html
I think se took it from www.carbhealth.com
I have another question and I know Jimmy promised to address is sometime in the future, but I would really like to know your opinion as well if you dont mind please:
How do you feel about saturated-animal-fats and especially the so called ‘toxins’ that animals store in the fats. Is there a biochemical proof that doing a low-carb diet will help the person to take up less of that stored toxins when consuming animal fats ? You wont believe how many South Africans is totaly pro-low carb, but not pro-animal fat because of this very reason and not because of the main-stream believe that fat causes calories etc.
Oops I meant to say our SA people are pro low-carb, but not pro-animal fat because of that very reason (toxins) and not because of the main-stram believe that fat causes cholestrol etc.
To Jaycee: I’m glad you like my blog–thanks for the compliment!
You asked, “why is the fats so low on the lowcarb pyramid ?” Actually, I’d say the fats are too high on the pyramid. In the U.S., most of the meat we buy is quite lean, so we have to add extra fat to get the percentage of calories up to 60-70%. Personally, I often use coconut oil, since it does not get rancid and is safe for frying and high temperature cooking.
As far as the need for high fat in a low-carb diet, you might find this article by John Yudkin interesting. After we have eaten our required vitamins and minerals, our essential fatty acids, and enough protein for repair, we still have to consume quite a few calores for energy. Being low-carbers, we know that eating carbs for energy leads to insulin release, which then leads to all sorts of problems. That leaves protein and fat. According to Yudkin, eating too much lean protein can lead to hyperammonemia, and eating sufficient fat is necessary to prevent this. He also suggests that, since dieters want to lose fat, it’s a good idea to get your body used to utilizing fat for energy. Not from Yudkin but from me, there seems to be some anecdotal evidence that eating large amounts of protein leads a low-carb-adapted body to convert it to glucose via gluconeogenesis, which leads to insulin release and its attendant problems. As you know, eating fat for energy does not lead to insulin release.
Thanks for your comment about glycemic index. I hope to post on fructose and how it’s processed in the body, but I’m not sure when that will happen. In my post about the glycemic index, I was trying to show that, insulin-release-wise, there is very little difference between simple and complex carbs, I wanted to make the point that complex carbs don’t provide protection from insulin release, and I figured that if I tried to explain the glycemic load concept, my point would get obscured in the details.
Dr. Carlson–Thanks for the specifics on the 10 grams of mystery carbohydrate in Atkins Advantage bars! As I understand it, maltodextrin is made of O-linked glucose and maltose. I would expect it to be hydrolyzed into glucose monosaccharides during digestion. I wonder why it would not cause a corresponding rise in insulin, even though the rise might be slower than observed from eating a bolus of glucose.
Similarly, two glycerin (aka glycerol) molecules can be converted to one gluose molecule via gluconeogenesis. In this study, the investigators observed that after 5 grams of oral glycerol, “Blood glucose remained unchanged in the controls, but rose on an average 13 mg/100 ml in insulin-requiring diabetics.”
Do you think that perhaps the rise in glucose from the Atkins bars was too slow to be observed by over-the-counter glucometers? Or perhaps the consitutive level of glucose uptake was able to account for the extra glucose molecules in your patients’ blood without requiring an increased amount of insulin.
Lady Stargazey ,
Thanks for your answer on the fats. I actually meant “Why is the amount they prescribe in the food ladder so low (little)” - and it seems like you agree with me. I personally feel that fats are equally important as protein and should be in the part right at the bottom with the meats etc.
I see you often refer to calories. The idea I got from Dr. Carlsons interview and writings is that this calories actually does not mean a thing in the world since digestion and combustion are two totally different things. This morning I saw somebody on some mad reality show swallow a battery and I thought by myself “hmmm now how many calories is that in terms of battery energy going to give his body? A Calorie is a Calorie is a calorie right ? Surely a battery is energy…” haha!
JayCee–
I have to confess, I think calories are important in the context of hormones. The hormones include insulin, glucagon, growth hormone, epinephrine, corticosteroids, androgen, estrogen, leptin, ghrelin, cholecystokinin and some others. The calories/macronutrients are the raw materials. The hormones determine how they are partitioned.
Hi Everyone!
Again, let me start by stating the calorie is irrelevent, but you all know my stance on that:-) It is the macronutrient composition of the food, which determines what hormones are released. Eat more sugar than fat and protein, less glucagon and growth hormone are secreted, and more insulin will be secreted. Eat more fat and protein, the reverse will happen. It’s interesting, as was pointed out above, be careful with protein consumption. Proteins will break down into amino acids. If the body sees too many amino acids, sugar can be produced from certain amino acids, and then we all have to worry about insulin secretion.
JayCee, you asked for somewhere to go to get an easier description of biochemistry, well, by golly, that’s what my book is all about! It was written so anyone, and I mean anyone can understand it. You can check some of it out for free on Amazon.com. I like to tell my patients that it was written in such a simple way that even a physician can understand it! Sounds obnoxious I know, but I present a factual and logical argument in a simplistic manner which only someone with no understanding of biochemistry can argue against it.
With maltodextrin and glycerin, I have had a few diabetics who could not get their sugars into the normal range when consuming foods with these sweeteners. When they stopped using those particular products, the sugars went into the normal range. I must stress that the majority of my Type 2 diabetics are in the normal range of blood sugar, without medications; due to an extremely low carb intake.
I feel compelled to mention a few things about aspartame, which has been blamed to cause everything from Multiple Sclerosis to Gulf War Syndrome. The whole controversy started as someone with (obviously) little chemistry knowlege noted a side chain which appeared to resemble formaldehyde on the aspartame molecule. then of course the accusations exploded. The internet reports stated that aspartame was broken down into formaldehyde and that was causing all the medical problems. Only trouble is, aspartame is nothing more than two amino acids linked together. The two amino acids are L-aspartic acid and phenylalanine. When these two things are linked together they create a sweet taste, which is why it is used as a sweetener. When we eat aspartame the body breaks it up into the two amino acids which are then processed as other amino acids are. SInce they are amino acids, one will generally not have an insulin release, unless of course the amino acids are used to create sugar. Now, getting back to that formaldehyde thing. When our bodies break down aspartame, no formaldehyde is released, only the two amino acids, that’s it. Our bodies do not have the necessary enzymes to cleave the molecule to release formaldehyde. The only people who cannot consume aspartame are people who do not make the enzyme necessary to break down aspartame. They are known as phenylketonurics.
As far as the toxins in saturated fat concern, it’s a bona fide one. I will only eat meat from recognized producers who avoid things like antibiotics and steroids in the raising of the cattle.
My comment on hyperammonemia and protein consumption; you’ll only see it in person’s with liver or kidney failure, not in healthy adults. This, by the way, is why alot of physicians mistakenly believe diets higher (notice I used the word higher, not high) in protein are dangerous.
OK, now I get to plug my book
I haven’t had a chance to check out the low carb pyramid yet, but I will.
Thanks for the post Dr. Carlson.
One quick question on your book please… Does it explain the difference between the energy from free fatty acids and the energy from glucose? If not would you please be so kind as to explain to me if the free fatty energy from a ketogenic diet actually enters the cells the same way as glucose, i.e. is insulin involved at all and would free fatty acids enter cells that are insulin resistant and would normally not accept energy from glucose?
Hi JayCee
Sorry it took so long to respond. No, my book does not get into how energy is derived from glucose or fat. Fact is, energy, in the form of ATP, is derived from both glucose and fatty acids. Fatty acids and glucose are both broken down to something called acetyl Coenzyme A. This happens to glucose via a process called glycolysis, and to fatty acids through beta oxidation. Once acetyl Coenzyme A is produced, it can enter the Kreb’s Cycle where some ATP is produced, but the vast majority of ATP is created in a process referred to as the hydrogen electron transport oxidative phosphorylation chain. So when we talk about ‘energy’, what we really mean is ATP (which stands for adenosine triphosphate).
Whether or not free fatty acids are used versus glucose, all depends on insulin. Since insulin stops the breakdown of fat, the more insulin, the less fatty acids are used to create ATP. Less insulin, more breakdown of fat, and then more fat is used to create ATP.
Even in an insulin resistant person, fatty acids can still be used to create ATP, as fatty acids use a different transport mechanism to get into the cell. This is why even in a type 2 diabetic, who by the way has a high insulin level in the blood stream, the ketogenic diet works wonders.
But then the question may be, “If a type 2 diabetic has higher insulin levels, wouldn’t this prevent the body from utilizing fat for fuel?” Answer: No, because when a person starts a ketogenic diet, all the body has at its disposal to create energy is free fatty acids. Also, this person is insulin resistant (one of the reasons why they are a type 2 diabetic in the first place), so the cell is not responding to insulin like it should.
JayCee, your questions were very insightful! I love answering questions like this, and I love the biochemistry and cellular physiology behind it all; but I didn’t think the majority of my readers would even care much about ATP and all that. I hope this helps!
Dr. James thanks again so much for your time and very insightful answers.
Cannot wait to get your book here in South Africa.!There is nothing that I like more than data, data, data i.e. facts. Especially with a controversial subject as dieting and especially this one.
“fatty acids can still be used to create ATP, as fatty acids use a different transport mechanism to get into the cell.” That is the magic words I was looking for! That explains why insulin resistance and diabetes can be cured.
Your post also compliments Taubes chapter in Diet Revolution so perfectly where he explains the whole process of alpha glycerol phosphate that plays such a big role in the creation of triglisirites in a high insulin environment versus the release of fatty acids in a low insulin environment.
Thanks again!
JayCee